257 So. 2d 853 - Sumrall v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1972
Citation profile
26 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently February 2017 · most notably 468 So. 2d 45 - Fuselier v. State (1985), Blue v. State (1996)
26 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Floyd v. State · 219 So. 2d 673 - New Orleans Baptist Theological Seminary v. Lacy · Pegram v. State · Ladnier v. State · Brown v. State
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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“It is a well-settled general rule that the issue on a criminal trial should be single and that the testimony should be confined to that issue and on the trial for one offense and prosecution should not be allowed to aid the proof against the defendant by showing he committed other offenses, even though of a like nature. Cummings v. State, 219 So.2d 673 (Miss. 1969); Ladnier v. State, 254 Miss. 469 , 182 So.2d 389 (1966); Brown v. State, 224 Miss. 498 , 80 So.2d 761 (1955); Pegram v. State, 223 Miss. 294 , 78 So.2d 153 (1955); Floyd v. State, 166 Miss. 15 , 148 So. 226 (1933).”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage“Mozingo was also allowed to testify that he rolled some cigarettes from the marijuana he had bought the night before, appellant [Sumrall] rolled some cigarettes from the marijuana he brought with him, and that they, along with others, went into the living room and smoked the marijuana. The state also attempted to prove by this witness that he had procured marijuana from appellant on another occasion some months prior to the alleged offense charged. The court finally sustained appellant's objection to this testimony and instructed the jury to disregard it, but refused to grant a mistrial. ( 257 So.2d at 853 ).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[I]t should be pointed out that the district attorney in the trial of this case attempted to inject into the trial other matters which had nothing to do with the issue being tried. Although the court sustained the objections to these matters, on a retrial of the case the prosecuting attorney should refrain from doing or saying anything that would tend to cause the jury to find the defendant guilty due to matters other than evidence relative to the crime. ( 257 So.2d at 854 ).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.