291 So. 2d 695 - Lanier v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “As a general rule, any physical object of visual evidence may be introduced into evidence if the objects are relevant to the facts in issue before the court. (Wilkins v. State, 264 So.2d 411 (Miss. 1972)). Of course, it must be first shown that such objects and articles are in some manner relevant to the issue. (Underhill, Criminal Evidence (4th ed.) [sec.] 115, at 148 (1935)). The rule is more liberally construed in circumstantial cases. (29 Am. Jur. 2d Evidence [sec.] 266, at 315 (1967); 22A C.J.S. Criminal Law [sec.] 637, at 499 (1961)). However, the mere finding of a rifle or other articles owned or in the possession of a defendant or deceased, wholly disconnected with the issue before the court, is properly excluded from the evidence before the jury. Strickland v. State, 269 So.2d 340 (Miss.1972); Gaston v. State, 239 Miss. 420 , 123 So.2d 546 (1960); 22A C.J.S. Criminal Law [sec.] 637, at 496 (1961).”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Rhodes v. State · 736 So. 2d 1058 - Alexander v. State