Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
7 Mississippi opinions name it 2 courts 1981–2025 2 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 |
|---|---|---|
Hunter v. Stateyellow2 sentences2005Walker relies on Hunter v. State, 684 So.2d 625, 639 (Miss.1996) (Sullivan, P.J., concurring in part & dissenting in part), where Presiding Justice Sullivan stated: Hunter was entitled to be punished only on the evidence before the jury at that time and only on the evidence relevant to his circumstances. 2003Walker relies on Hunter v. State, 684 So. 2d 625, 639 (Miss. 1996) (Sullivan, P.J., concurring in part & dissenting in part), where Presiding Justice Sullivan stated: Hunter was entitled to be punished only on the evidence before the jury at that time and only on the evidence relevant to his circumstances. | 2 | 2 |
Davis v. Stategreen2 sentences2025The Court noted that Davis did not object to the references made during the guilt phase of the trial,2 and it ultimately found that the “assignment of error [wa]s without substantive merit.” Id. at 1248, 1249 . 2025On appeal, “Davis argue[d] that the State committed reversible error in referring during the guilt phase and the subsequent penalty phase to the fact that [the victim] was a police officer[,]” asserting “that [the victim]’s occupation as a police officer ha[d] no relevance in this case.” Id. at 1247 . | 1 | 1 |
Shalonda Nikkia Vale v. State of Mississippigreen1 sentence2022Vale v. State, 243 So. 3d 205, 209 (¶15) (Miss. | 1 | 1 |
Ross v. Stategreen2 sentences2016It is true that “[a]rguing statements of fact which are not in evidence or necessarily inferable from facts in evidence is error when those statements are prejudicial.” Ross, 954 So. 2d at 1002 (internal citations omitted). 2016It is true that “[ajrguing statements of fact which ■ are not in evidence or necessarily inferable from facts in evidence is error when those statements are prejudicial.” Ross, 954 So.2d at 1002 (internal citations omitted). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Mississippi. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Buckley v. State
green
1 sentence1987Nixon cites as authority Buckley v. State, 223 So.2d 524 (Miss. 1969) which held: [W]here two or more persons are jointly indicted for the same offense but are separately tried, a judgment of conviction against one of them is not competent evidence on the trial of the other because such plea of guilty or conviction is no evidence of the guilt of the party being tried. | 1 | 1987–1987 |
Brady v. Maryland
green
2 sentences1981Last argument asserted by the defendant in his appeal is that the state committed reversible error in its failure "to provide exculpatory material requested by the defense." He cites Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 , 83 S.Ct. 1194 , 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963) and United States v. Agurs, 427 U.S. 97 , 96 S.Ct. 2392 , 49 L.Ed.2d 342 (1976) in support of this proposition. 1981Last argument asserted by the defendant in his appeal is that the state committed reversible error in its failure "to provide exculpatory material requested by the defense." He cites Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 , 83 S.Ct. 1194 , 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963) and United States v. Agurs, 427 U.S. 97 , 96 S.Ct. 2392 , 49 L.Ed.2d 342 (1976) in support of this proposition. | 1 | 1981–1981 |
United States v. Agurs
red
2 sentences1981Last argument asserted by the defendant in his appeal is that the state committed reversible error in its failure "to provide exculpatory material requested by the defense." He cites Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 , 83 S.Ct. 1194 , 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963) and United States v. Agurs, 427 U.S. 97 , 96 S.Ct. 2392 , 49 L.Ed.2d 342 (1976) in support of this proposition. 1981Last argument asserted by the defendant in his appeal is that the state committed reversible error in its failure "to provide exculpatory material requested by the defense." He cites Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 , 83 S.Ct. 1194 , 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963) and United States v. Agurs, 427 U.S. 97 , 96 S.Ct. 2392 , 49 L.Ed.2d 342 (1976) in support of this proposition. | 1 | 1981–1981 |
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.