54 Mississippi opinions name it 2 courts 1990–2024 4 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 |
|---|---|---|
Adams v. Stategreen2 sentences2014Id. (citing Adams v. State, 772 So.2d 1010, 1020-21 (Miss.2000)). ¶ 4. 2012See Adams v. State, 772 So.2d 1010, 1020-21 (¶¶ 50-51) (Miss.2000) (citation omitted). | 3 | 3 |
Tudor v. Stategreen2 sentences2000M.R.E. 103; Tudor v. State, 299 So.2d 682 , 685-86 (Miss.1974). 1997M.R.E. 103; Tudor v. State, 299 So. 2d 682, 685-86 (Miss. 1974). | 2 | 3 |
Martin v. Stategreen2 sentences2013“This Court will reverse a trial court’s finding that a confession is admissible only when an incorrect legal standard was applied, manifest error was committed, or the decision is contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence.” Martin v. State, 871 So.2d 693, 701 (¶ 30) (Miss.2004) (quoting Duplantis v. State, 644 So.2d 1235, 1243 (Miss.1994)). 2010“This Court will reverse a trial court’s finding that a confession is admissible only when an incorrect legal standard was applied, manifest error was committed, or the decision is contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence.” Martin v. State, 871 So. 2d 693, 701 (¶ 30) (Miss. 2004) (quoting Duplantis v. State, 644 So. 2d 1235, 1243 (Miss. 1994)). | 2 | 2 |
Duplantis v. Stategreen2 sentences2013“This Court will reverse a trial court’s finding that a confession is admissible only when an incorrect legal standard was applied, manifest error was committed, or the decision is contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence.” Martin v. State, 871 So.2d 693, 701 (¶ 30) (Miss.2004) (quoting Duplantis v. State, 644 So.2d 1235, 1243 (Miss.1994)). 2010“This Court will reverse a trial court’s finding that a confession is admissible only when an incorrect legal standard was applied, manifest error was committed, or the decision is contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence.” Martin v. State, 871 So. 2d 693, 701 (¶ 30) (Miss. 2004) (quoting Duplantis v. State, 644 So. 2d 1235, 1243 (Miss. 1994)). | 2 | 2 |
Jenkins v. McQuaidgreen2 sentences2005Jenkins v. McQuaid, 153 Miss. 185 , 120 So. 814, 816 (1929). 2005Jenkins v. McQuaid, 153 Miss. 185 , 120 So. 814, 816 (1929). | 2 | 2 |
Carpenter v. Dawsongreen2 sentences2003See Carpenter v. Dawson, 701 So.2d 806 (Miss.1997)." (emphasis added). [13] Williams argues that, because he cites it in his order, the trial judge must be unaware that Carpenter was overruled by Reaves and Carr . 2002See Carpenter v. Dawson, 701 So. 2d 806 (Miss. 1997).” (emphasis added).13 Williams argues that, because he cites it in his order, the trial judge must be unaware that Carpenter was overruled by Reaves and Carr. | 2 | 2 |
Wilcher v. Stategreen2 sentences1999See also Wilcher v. State, 697 So.2d 1087, 1098 (Miss.1997) (factually distinguishing and declining to extend Williams analysis to a case involving voir dire ). ¶ 17. 1995See also Wilcher v. State, 697 So. 2d 1087, 1098 (Miss. 1997) (factually distinguishing and declining to extend Williams analysis to a case involving voir dire). ¶17. | 2 | 2 |
Cole v. Stategreen2 sentences1996See Cole v. State, 525 So.2d 365, 369 (Miss. 1987) (citations omitted) (holding that applicability of the contemporaneous objection rule "is not diminished in a capital case."). 1990See Cole v. State, 525 So. 2d 365, 369 (Miss. 1987)(citations omitted) (holding that applicability of the contemporaneous objection rule "is not diminished in a capital case."). ¶53. | 2 | 2 |
Gray v. Stategreen2 sentences1996This Court has held that "if a comment is so inflammatory that the trial court should have objected on his own motion, the point may be considered." Handley v. State, 574 So.2d 671, 679 (Miss. 1990); Gray v. State, 487 So.2d 1304, 1312 (Miss. 1986). 1990This Court has held that "if a comment is so inflammatory that the trial court should have objected on his own motion, the point may be considered." Handley v. State, 574 So. 2d 671, 679 (Miss. 1990); Gray v. State, 487 So. 2d 1304, 1312 (Miss. 1988). | 2 | 2 |
Handley v. Stategreen2 sentences1996This Court has held that "if a comment is so inflammatory that the trial court should have objected on his own motion, the point may be considered." Handley v. State, 574 So.2d 671, 679 (Miss. 1990); Gray v. State, 487 So.2d 1304, 1312 (Miss. 1986). 1990This Court has held that "if a comment is so inflammatory that the trial court should have objected on his own motion, the point may be considered." Handley v. State, 574 So. 2d 671, 679 (Miss. 1990); Gray v. State, 487 So. 2d 1304, 1312 (Miss. 1988). | 2 | 2 |
McClain v. Stategreen2 sentences2012Reversal is warranted only if “after viewing all the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, one or more of the elements of the charged offense is such that reasonable and fair-minded jurors could only find the accused not guilty.” Id. (internal quotations and citations omitted). ¶ 19. 2006A motion for directed verdict and JNOV, as well as a request for peremptory instruction, challenges the legal sufficiency of the evidence, "since each requires consideration of the evidence before the court when made." McClain v. State, 625 So.2d 774, 778 (Miss.1993). | 1 | 2 |
Jones v. Stategreen1 sentence2024“The issue of justifiable self-defense presents a question of the weight and credibility of the evidence, rather than sufficiency, and 14 is to be determined by the jury.” Jones v. State, 39 So. 3d 860, 865 (Miss. 2010) (citing Wade v. State, 748 So. 2d 771, 775 (Miss. 1999)). “[A]ny factual disputes are properly resolved by the jury and do not mandate a new trial.” Id. (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting McNeal v. State, 617 So. 2d 999, 1009 (Miss. 1993)). | 1 | 1 |
McNeal v. Stategreen1 sentence2024“The issue of justifiable self-defense presents a question of the weight and credibility of the evidence, rather than sufficiency, and 14 is to be determined by the jury.” Jones v. State, 39 So. 3d 860, 865 (Miss. 2010) (citing Wade v. State, 748 So. 2d 771, 775 (Miss. 1999)). “[A]ny factual disputes are properly resolved by the jury and do not mandate a new trial.” Id. (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting McNeal v. State, 617 So. 2d 999, 1009 (Miss. 1993)). | 1 | 1 |
Wade v. Stategreen2 sentences2024“The issue of justifiable self-defense presents a question of the weight and credibility of the evidence, rather than sufficiency, and 14 is to be determined by the jury.” Jones v. State, 39 So. 3d 860, 865 (Miss. 2010) (citing Wade v. State, 748 So. 2d 771, 775 (Miss. 1999)). “[A]ny factual disputes are properly resolved by the jury and do not mandate a new trial.” Id. (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting McNeal v. State, 617 So. 2d 999, 1009 (Miss. 1993)). 2024“The issue of justifiable self-defense presents a question of the weight and credibility of the evidence, rather than sufficiency, and 14 is to be determined by the jury.” Jones v. State, 39 So. 3d 860, 865 (Miss. 2010) (citing Wade v. State, 748 So. 2d 771, 775 (Miss. 1999)). “[A]ny factual disputes are properly resolved by the jury and do not mandate a new trial.” Id. (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting McNeal v. State, 617 So. 2d 999, 1009 (Miss. 1993)). | 1 | 1 |
Antonio Williams v. State of Mississippigreen1 sentence2023Ann. § 99-39-27(4) (Rev. 2020), and find that the claims are unbarred and present a “substantial showing of the denial of a state or federal right.” § 99-39-27(5); see Williams v. State, 158 So. 3d 309, 312 (Miss. 2015) (“Because we find that Williams’s motion presents no ‘substantial showing of the denial of a state or federal right,’ we affirm the judgment of the circuit judge.” (emphasis added)). | 1 | 1 |
Burns v. Stategreen1 sentence2021Burns v. State, 984 So. 2d 1024, 1025 (¶7) (Miss. 2008). | 1 | 1 |
Joe Johnson v. State of Mississippigreen1 sentence2019See Johnson v. State, 191 So. 3d 732, 735-36 (¶39) (Miss. | 1 | 1 |
Rowland v. Statered1 sentence2017The trial court, citing Rowland v. State, 42 So.3d 503, 506 (¶ 9) (Miss. 2010), properly noted that “fundamental constitutional rights are exceptions from the procedural bars of the UPCCRA, [but] mere assertions of constitutional-rights violations do not suffice to overcome this bar.” The trial court found—and we agree—that Williams failed to do more than merely assert his constitutional rights had -been violated. | 1 | 1 |
Eakes v. Stategreen1 sentence2017Eakes, 665 So.2d at 859 (¶ 18); Griffin v. State, 584 So.2d 1274, 1276 (Miss. 1991). | 1 | 1 |
Smith v. Stategreen1 sentence2017See id.; Smith, 831 So.2d at 594 (¶¶13-14). | 1 | 1 |
Griffin v. Stategreen1 sentence2017Eakes, 665 So.2d at 859 (¶ 18); Griffin v. State, 584 So.2d 1274, 1276 (Miss. 1991). | 1 | 1 |
Bolton v. Weinergreen1 sentence2015Williams, 158 So.3d at 332, 2014 WL 2462998, at *2 . | 1 | 1 |
| Fulgham v. Stategreen | 1 | 1 |
| Ward v. Stategreen | 1 | 1 |
| Jefferson v. Stategreen | 1 | 1 |
| Moore v. Stategreen | 1 | 1 |
| McGruder v. Stategreen | 1 | 1 |
| Sea v. Stategreen | 1 | 1 |
| Walton v. Stategreen | 1 | 1 |
| Wilson v. Stategreen | 1 | 1 |
| Manix v. Stategreen | 1 | 1 |
| University of Southern Miss. v. Williamsgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Gray v. Stategreen | 1 | 1 |
| Crump v. Fieldsgreen | 1 | 1 |
| McClendon v. Stategreen | 1 | 1 |
| Wright v. McAdorygreen | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Mississippi. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Williams v. State
green
2 sentences1996There was no evidence of any "deal." This Court denies Williams' motion for post-conviction relief. *47 STATEMENT OF THE FACTS PROCEDURAL HISTORY This Court, in Williams v. State, 544 So.2d 782 (Miss. 1987), stated "The facts of this case are so bizarre and the methods used to bring about the death of Miss Pierce are so relentlessly savage that no purpose will be served by repeating them here, except where they are essential to the ends of justice in dealing with the issues raised by the appeal." Id. at 784 . 1996There was no evidence of any "deal." This Court denies Williams' motion for post-conviction relief. *47 STATEMENT OF THE FACTS PROCEDURAL HISTORY This Court, in Williams v. State, 544 So.2d 782 (Miss. 1987), stated "The facts of this case are so bizarre and the methods used to bring about the death of Miss Pierce are so relentlessly savage that no purpose will be served by repeating them here, except where they are essential to the ends of justice in dealing with the issues raised by the appeal." Id. at 784 . | 3 | 1990–1996 |
Williams v. State
green
2 sentences2011Id. at 1380 . 2009Id. at 1380 . | 2 | 2009–2011 |
Read v. State
green
2 sentences2009Williams's brief provides that “if this Court finds the record does not affirmatively show ineffective assistance of counsel, [Williams] respectfully requests the issue be dismissed without prejudice to allow Williams to supplement the record with additional evidence on post-conviction.” As in McQuarter , this Court recognizes Williams's “right to raise the ineffective assistance claim via appropriate post-convictions proceedings.” McQuarter, 574 So.2d at 687 (citing Read v. State, 430 So.2d 832 (Miss. 1983)). 2008Based upon the aforementioned analysis, this Court affirms the judgment and sentencing order of the Circuit Court of Pike County. 10 Williams’s brief provides that “if this Court finds the record does not affirmatively show ineffective assistance of counsel, [Williams] respectfully requests the issue be dismissed without prejudice to allow Williams to supplement the record with additional evidence on post-conviction.” As in McQuarter, this Court recognizes Williams’s “right to raise the ineffective assistance claim via appropriate post-convictions proceedings.” McQuarter, 574 So. 2d at 687 (ci | 2 | 2008–2009 |
McQuarter v. State
green
2 sentences2009Williams's brief provides that “if this Court finds the record does not affirmatively show ineffective assistance of counsel, [Williams] respectfully requests the issue be dismissed without prejudice to allow Williams to supplement the record with additional evidence on post-conviction.” As in McQuarter , this Court recognizes Williams's “right to raise the ineffective assistance claim via appropriate post-convictions proceedings.” McQuarter, 574 So.2d at 687 (citing Read v. State, 430 So.2d 832 (Miss. 1983)). 2008Based upon the aforementioned analysis, this Court affirms the judgment and sentencing order of the Circuit Court of Pike County. 10 Williams’s brief provides that “if this Court finds the record does not affirmatively show ineffective assistance of counsel, [Williams] respectfully requests the issue be dismissed without prejudice to allow Williams to supplement the record with additional evidence on post-conviction.” As in McQuarter, this Court recognizes Williams’s “right to raise the ineffective assistance claim via appropriate post-convictions proceedings.” McQuarter, 574 So. 2d at 687 (ci | 2 | 2008–2009 |
Old Chief v. United States
green
2 sentences2008Williams cited no case law before the trial court, but on appeal argues that Old Chief v. United States, 519 U.S. 172 , 117 S.Ct. 644 , 136 L.Ed.2d 574 (1997) ( Old Chief I ) is dispositive of the issue. ¶ 37. 2008Williams cited no case law before the trial court, but on appeal argues that Old Chief v. United States, 519 U.S. 172 , 117 S.Ct. 644 , 136 L.Ed.2d 574 (1997) ( Old Chief I ) is dispositive of the issue. ¶ 37. | 2 | 2006–2008 |
Hobgood v. Koch Pipeline Southeast, Inc.
green
2 sentences2005The McConnells and the Noels contend that Mississippi law requires that a document is to be considered "as a whole in order to ascertain the intention of the parties." Hobgood v. Koch Pipeline Southeast, Inc., 769 So.2d at 843 . 2003The McConnells and the Noels contend that Mississippi law requires that a document is to be considered “as a whole in order to ascertain the intention of the parties.” Hobgood 9 Koch Pipeline Southeast, Inc., 769 So. 2d at 843 . | 2 | 2003–2005 |
Overstreet v. George County School Dist.
green
2 sentences2003In Overstreet v. George County School District, 741 So.2d 965 (Miss.Ct. 2002In Overstreet v. George County School District, 741 So. 2d 965 (Miss. | 2 | 2002–2003 |
Howard Lindsey v. State of Mississippi
green
1 sentence2024Id. | 1 | 2024–2024 |
| Williams v. State neutral | 1 | 2015–2015 |
| Williams v. State green | 1 | 2014–2014 |
| Williams v. State green | 1 | 2014–2014 |
| Williams v. State green | 1 | 2011–2011 |
| Colenburg v. State green | 1 | 2011–2011 |
| Smith v. State green | 1 | 2007–2007 |
| King v. American RV Centers, Inc. green | 1 | 2004–2004 |
| Strickland v. Washington green | 1 | 2001–2001 |
| Eldridge v. State green | 1 | 2000–2000 |
| Smith v. State green | 1 | 2000–2000 |
| Wiley v. State green | 1 | 1998–1998 |
| Miranda v. Arizona green | 1 | 1993–1993 |
| Williams v. State green | 1 | 1991–1991 |
| Solem v. Helm red | 1 | 1990–1990 |
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.