243 So. 2d 564 - Flowers v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 state decisions

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.

1. “On the second issue, however, we disagree with the contention of the State that hospital records may be introduced in a criminal case. It is true that hospital records have been accepted as primary evidence in certain civil cases. It is not true, however, that statements made in hospital records by persons not summoned as witnesses may be introduced as primary evidence in criminal cases. Section 26, Mississippi Constitution (1890), provides, among other things, that: In all criminal prosecutions the accused shall have a right * * * to be contronted by the witnesses against him, ⅜ * * This right of confrontation and the right to cross-examine witnesses lie at the heart of due process. We specifically held in the case of Spears v. State, 241 So.2d 148 (Miss.1970), that hospital records as primary evidence were inadmissible. See also the cases set out by the United States Supreme Court in Dutton v. Evans, 400 U.S. 74 , 91 S.Ct. 210 , 27 L.Ed.2d 213 (1970). [ 243 So.2d at 565 ],”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 440 So. 2d 312 - Williams v. State