6 Mississippi opinions name it 2 courts 1991–2024 1 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 |
|---|---|---|
Detroit Marine Engineering v. McReegreen2 sentences2002Compare the language used in P-1 with the actual statutory text of (1)(d), quoted in footnote 1, supra. The language used in P-1, a crucial instruction, makes no literal sense. [12] The record reflects that Cox was very familiar with the location, as her mother's home was only 125 feet from the Mileston crossing, and she should have been aware of any dangers the overgrowth posed. [13] Our recent case law on vegetation-obscured railroad crossings does not speak to the apportionment of fault. 2000Compare the language used in P-1 with the actual statutory text of (1)(d), quoted in footnote 1, supra. The language used in P-1, a crucial instruction, makes no literal sense. 12. | 2 | 2 |
Rhymes v. Stategreen2 sentences2001This Court emphasized there that nothing in the record indicated any effort by the defendant or his attorneys to record that alleged witness's testimony and cited previous precedent holding that "the failure to attempt to secure a witness is fatal to the claim of actual prejudice." Id. at 50 ; see also Rhymes v. State, 638 So.2d 1270, 1274 (Miss.1994) (holding that "the fact that there was a total failure to attempt to secure [a crucial defense witness'] appearance by subpoena is fatal to the claim of actual prejudice"). 1999This Court emphasized there that nothing in the record indicated any effort by the defendant or his attorneys to record that alleged witness's testimony and cited previous precedent holding that "the failure to attempt to secure a witness is fatal to the claim of actual prejudice." Id. at 50 ; see also Rhymes v. State, 638 So. 2d 1270, 1274 (Miss. 1994) (holding that "the fact that there was a total failure to attempt to secure [a crucial defense witness'] appearance by subpoena is fatal to the claim of actual prejudice"). | 2 | 2 |
Overstreet v. Stategreen1 sentence2024See Overstreet, 17 So. 3d at 621 (¶1). | 1 | 1 |
Alabama Great Southern R. Co. v. Leegreen1 sentence2002See Lee, 826 So.2d 1232 (Miss.2002) (apportionment not raised as error); Clark v. Ill. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Mississippi. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Gray v. State
green
2 sentences2001This Court emphasized there that nothing in the record indicated any effort by the defendant or his attorneys to record that alleged witness's testimony and cited previous precedent holding that "the failure to attempt to secure a witness is fatal to the claim of actual prejudice." Id. at 50 ; see also Rhymes v. State, 638 So.2d 1270, 1274 (Miss.1994) (holding that "the fact that there was a total failure to attempt to secure [a crucial defense witness'] appearance by subpoena is fatal to the claim of actual prejudice"). 1999This Court emphasized there that nothing in the record indicated any effort by the defendant or his attorneys to record that alleged witness's testimony and cited previous precedent holding that "the failure to attempt to secure a witness is fatal to the claim of actual prejudice." Id. at 50 ; see also Rhymes v. State, 638 So. 2d 1270, 1274 (Miss. 1994) (holding that "the fact that there was a total failure to attempt to secure [a crucial defense witness'] appearance by subpoena is fatal to the claim of actual prejudice"). | 2 | 1999–2001 |
State v. McClure
green
1 sentence1991Most importantly, as noted by the Oregon court in McClure , the crucial factors in the determination of whether a prior conviction is to be admitted have nothing to do with the testimony offered by the defendant. 692 P.2d at 592 . | 1 | 1991–1991 |
Peterson v. State
green
1 sentence1991Like Oregon, in Peterson v. State, 518 So.2d 632 (Miss. 1987), we adopted the five factor list enunciated by the federal courts for Rule 609 determinations. [2] Only the last two of those factors involve the defendant's testimony and, on reflection, it can readily be seen that they tend to offset each other. | 1 | 1991–1991 |
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.