Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 394 SO2D 878 - Tribbett v. State

Tribbett v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1981

Citation profile

21
cited by 21 later decisions
2
states following
December 2007
most recently cited

21 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 21 later decisions — most recently December 2007

21 state decisions

120198119902000decided

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 Lamar v. State · McLemore v. State · 370 So. 2d 930 - Fermo v. State · 291 So. 2d 182 - Boone v. State · 258 So. 2d 436 - Alston 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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “The usual entrapment case which arises under Mississippi law involves a confidential informant or police officer who originates the sale of contraband by supplying it to the accused, who then, acting in complicity with the confidential informant or police officer, sells or disposes of it to another officer or person who initiates the prosecution.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “"`Entrapment' means inducing or leading a person to commit a crime not ordinarily planned by them. Evidence has been presented that the Defendants were induced to commit the crime by law enforcement officers or their agents. For you to find the Defendant guilty, the state must prove to your satisfaction beyond a reasonable doubt that the Defendants were already willing to commit the crime and that the law enforcement officers or their agents merely gave them the opportunity."”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “Entrapment is an affirmative defense. The defendant must go forward with the proof to establish this defense, and if he does so, the state has the burden of proof on that issue.”
    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.