Wall v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
7 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 7 later decisions — most recently September 2018
7 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 360 So. 2d 1206 - Bell v. State · Cole v. State · Kitchens v. State · Thomas v. State · Hutchins 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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Although persons may be convicted of crimes on the uncorroborated testimony of accomplices, such testimony is to be viewed with great caution and suspicion. In Thomas v. State, 340 So.2d 1 (Miss. 1976), in discussing the principle, this Court said: "The law is settled in this state that the uncorroborated testimony of an accomplice will support a guilty verdict, but the rule requires that such uncorroborated testimony should be viewed with great caution and suspicion and that it must be reasonable and not improbable or self-contradictory or substantially impeached. Black v. State, Miss., 336 So.2d 1302 , handed down September 7, 1976; Hutchins v. State, 220 So.2d 276 (Miss. 1969); Cole v. State, 217 Miss. 779 , 65 So.2d 262 (1953)." 340 So.2d at 2 . ( 379 So.2d at 531 ).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Bell v. State“'proof of motive is not essential to a conviction for felonious homicide' " was defective because it "was prejudicial to the appellant and well could have confused the jury into returning a guilty verdict after having been told by the court that motive was not required to be shown”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[I]n extreme cases, this Court may raise an objection to a jury instruction in order to prevent manifest injustice.”
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.