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.
6 Mississippi opinions name it 2 courts 1998–2020 0 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 |
|---|---|---|
Smith v. Stategreen1 sentence2017“Under the plain-error doctrine,” this Court “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 (Miss. 2012) (quoting Smith v. State, 986 So.2d 290, 294 (Miss. 2008)). | 1 | 1 |
Conners v. Stategreen1 sentence2017“Under the plain-error doctrine,” this Court “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 (Miss. 2012) (quoting Smith v. State, 986 So.2d 290, 294 (Miss. 2008)). | 1 | 1 |
Patrick v. Stategreen1 sentence2011Patrick v. State, 754 So.2d 1194, 1195-96 (¶¶ 7, 12) (Miss.2000). | 1 | 1 |
Luckett v. Stategreen1 sentence2006See Luckett v. State, 582 So.2d 428, 429-30 (Miss.1991) (where a judge committed plain error and denied a defendant due process by issuing a sentence in violation of statute); Smith v. State, 477 So.2d 191 (Miss.1985) (where a defendant was sentenced under a harsher statute that was not the subject of the indictment). ¶ 7. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Mississippi. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Nichols v. Munn
green
2 sentences1999In Nichols v. Munn, 565 So.2d 1132 (Miss. 1990), we found that the trial judge committed plain error by interjecting himself into the lawsuit in the presence of the jury. 1998In Nichols v. Munn, 565 So. 2d 1132 (Miss. 1990), we found that the trial judge committed plain error by interjecting himself into the lawsuit in the presence of the jury. | 2 | 1998–1999 |
Brady v. Maryland
green
1 sentence2020We find no reversible error and affirm. 1 Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963). | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Smith v. State
green
1 sentence2006See Luckett v. State, 582 So.2d 428, 429-30 (Miss.1991) (where a judge committed plain error and denied a defendant due process by issuing a sentence in violation of statute); Smith v. State, 477 So.2d 191 (Miss.1985) (where a defendant was sentenced under a harsher statute that was not the subject of the indictment). ¶ 7. | 1 | 2006–2006 |
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.