14 Mississippi opinions name it 2 courts 2006–2025 5 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Mississippi courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Franklin Fitzpatrick v. State of Mississippigreen2 sentences2017“A defendant’s failure to object to a jury instruction at trial creates a procedural bar 11 that prohibits appellate review of the issue, unless there is plain error.” Fitzpatrick v. State, 175 So. 3d 515, 522 (¶31) (Miss. 2015) (reh’g denied Oct. 15, 2015) (citation omitted). 2017“A defendant’s failure to object to a jury instruction at trial creates a procedural bar 11 that prohibits appellate review of the issue, unless there is plain error.” Fitzpatrick v. State, 175 So. 3d 515, 522 (¶31) (Miss. 2015) (reh’g denied Oct. 15, 2015) (citation omitted). | 2 | 2 |
Smith v. Stategreen2 sentences2016“Under the plain-error doctrine, we can recognize obvious error which was not properly raised by the defendant on appeal, and which affects a defendant’s ‘fundamental, substantive right.’ ” Smith v. State, 986 So.2d 290, 294 (¶ 10) (Miss.2008) (citation omitted). 2012“Under the plain-error doctrine, we can recognize obvious error which was not properly raised by the defendant ... and which affects a defendant’s ‘fundamental, substantive right.’ ” Smith v. State, 986 So.2d 290, 294 (Miss.2008) (quoting Debrow v. State, 972 So.2d 550, 553 (Miss.2007)). | 2 | 2 |
Verenzo Cartrell Green v. State of Mississippigreen1 sentence2022See, e.g., Green v. State, 183 So. 3d 28, 30-31 (¶6) (Miss. 2016). | 1 | 1 |
Hearn v. Stategreen1 sentence2021Ct. App. 2016) (quoting Hearn v. State, 3 So. 3d 722, 736 (¶36) (Miss. 2008)). | 1 | 1 |
David Lee May v. State of Mississippigreen1 sentence2021We recognize that Scruggs’s failure to object to the admission of this evidence at trial would normally serve as a procedural bar to appellate review; however, we also recognize that we may review this issue under the plain-error doctrine. ¶20. “‘The plain-error doctrine is implicated when an error at trial affects substantial rights and results in a manifest miscarriage of justice.’” May v. State, 222 So. 3d 1074, 1084 (¶30) (Miss. | 1 | 1 |
Conerly v. Stategreen1 sentence2017See Conerly v. State , 760 So.2d 737 , 739-40 (¶ 5) (Miss. 2000). ¶ 25. | 1 | 1 |
Alpha Gulf Coast, Inc. v. Jacksongreen1 sentence2015Under the plain error doctrine, the Court “retains the inherent authority to notice error to prevent the manifest miscarriage of justice, despite trial counsel’s failure to preserve the error.” Alpha Gulf Coast, Inc. v. Jackson, 801 So.2d 709, 727 (¶ 60) (Miss.2001) (citing Johnson v. Fargo, 604 So.2d 306, 311 (Miss.1992)). | 1 | 1 |
Johnson v. Fargogreen1 sentence2015Under the plain error doctrine, the Court “retains the inherent authority to notice error to prevent the manifest miscarriage of justice, despite trial counsel’s failure to preserve the error.” Alpha Gulf Coast, Inc. v. Jackson, 801 So.2d 709, 727 (¶ 60) (Miss.2001) (citing Johnson v. Fargo, 604 So.2d 306, 311 (Miss.1992)). | 1 | 1 |
Debrow v. Stategreen1 sentence2012“Under the plain-error doctrine, we can recognize obvious error which was not properly raised by the defendant ... and which affects a defendant’s ‘fundamental, substantive right.’ ” Smith v. State, 986 So.2d 290, 294 (Miss.2008) (quoting Debrow v. State, 972 So.2d 550, 553 (Miss.2007)). | 1 | 1 |
Porter v. Stategreen2 sentences2010Id. at 260-61 (¶ 36). 2010Id. at 260-61 (¶ 36). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Mississippi. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Conners v. State
green
2 sentences2023Id. 2018"Under the plain-error doctrine, we can recognize obvious error which was not properly raised by the defendant and which affects a defendant's fundamental, substantive right." Conners v. State , 92 So.3d 676 , 682 (¶ 15) (Miss. 2012). | 2 | 2018–2023 |
Christmas v. State
green
1 sentence2025Id. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Faron Young v. State of Mississippi
green
1 sentence2024Id. at (¶¶25, 28). 14 ¶29. | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Harris v. State
green
1 sentence2006Id. | 1 | 2006–2006 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.