341 So. 2d 913 - Knowles v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1977
Citation profile
10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently December 2006
10 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
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 3500
Relies on Jencks v. United States · Rideau v. Louisiana · Palermo v. United States · Brown v. State of Mississippi · United States v. Augenblick
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“One who steals property cannot be convicted of receiving, concealing or aiding in concealing stolen property.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“In Mattox v. State, 243 Miss. 402 , 137 So.2d 920 (1962), on suggestion of error 139 So.2d 653 (1962), we held that granting or refusing an accused's request for the production or inspection of a writing in the possession of the prosecution lies in the sound discretion of the trial court. The procedure for laying a proper foundation was stated in Mattox, as follows: Refusal of an accused's request for production of such a writing may be based upon the failure to lay a proper foundation by taking the necessary preliminary steps and by showing that the statement is at variance with the writer's testimony. Anno., 156 A.L.R. at 350. Since there were no material contradictions in Grayson's testimony, it was the duty of appellant's counsel to lay a proper foundation in some other way for inspection of the statement. This may be done by submitting the statement to the trial court for an inspection by the presiding judge as to whether it reveals any contradictory matter. Appellant's counsel did not do this, and laid no foundation for otherwise requiring production of the statement. ... . The foregoing principles are in accord with the great weight of authority and with the practice in this state, as indicated by Eaton v. State ( 163 Miss. 130 , 140 So. 729 ), and the discussion in Bellew v. State, 238 Miss. 734, 752, 756 , 106 So.2d 146 (1958), app. dismissed, 360 U.S. 473 , 79 S.Ct. 1430 , 3 L.Ed.2d 1531 , 361 U.S. 858 , 80 S.Ct. 43 , 4 L.Ed.2d 96 . ( 243 Miss. at 418, 419, 420 ) [ ”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“revise the crime of receiving stolen property”
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.