Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 29 SO3D 126 - Smith v. State

Smith v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2010

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
June 2014
most recently cited

3 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 633 So. 2d 978 - Puckett v. Stuckey · 986 So. 2d 928 - Moore v. State · Stewart v. Walls · 323 So. 2d 539 - Nelson v. Tullos

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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “The purpose of this article is to revise, streamline[,] and clarify the rules and statutes pertaining to post-conviction[-] collateral [-] relief law and procedures, to resolve any conflicts therein[,] and to provide the courts of this state with an exclusive and uniform procedure for the collateral review of convictions and sentences. Specifically, this article repeals the statutory writ of error coram nobis, supersedes Rule 8.07 of the Mississippi Uniform Criminal Rules of Circuit Court Practice and abolishes the common law writs relating to post-conviction collateral relief, including by way of illustration but not limitation, error coram nobis, error coram vobis, and post-conviction habeas corpus, as well as statutory post-conviction habeas corpus. The relief formerly accorded by such terits may be obtained by an appropriate motion under this article.”
    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.