223 W. Va. 197 - State v. Messer’s Empirical Analysis
2008
Citation profile
6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
October 2015
most recently cited
6 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Calderon v. Thompson · United States v. Williams · 194 W. Va. 657 - State v. Guthrie · 194 W. Va. 3 - State v. Miller
Most-quoted passages
The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In reviewing allegedly improper comments made by a prosecutor during closing argument, we are mindful that ‘[c]ounsel necessarily have great latitude in the argument of a ease,’ State v. Clifford, 58 W.Va. 681, 687 , 52 S.E. 864, 866 (1906) (citation omitted), and that “[ujndue restriction should not be placed on a prosecuting attorney in his argument to the jury.” State v. Davis, 139 W.Va. 645, 653 , 81 S.E.2d 95, 101 (1954), overruled, in part, on other grounds, State v. Bragg, 140 W.Va. 585 , 87 S.E.2d 689 (1955). Accordingly, “[t]he discretion of the trial court in ruling on the propriety of argument by counsel before the jury will not be interfered with by the appellate court, unless it appears that the rights of the complaining party have been prejudiced, or that manifest injustice resulted therefrom.” Syllabus Point 3, State v. Boggs, 103 W.Va. 641 , 138 S.E. 321 (1927).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.