Barnes v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
20 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently June 2013
20 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 State v. Talbot · Griffin v. State · 407 So. 2d 530 - Pace v. State · 381 So. 2d 1024 - Norman v. State · 291 So. 2d 182 - Boone 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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The agreement need not be formal or express, but may be inferred from the circumstances, particularly by declarations, acts and conduct of the alleged conspirators.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“The Court instructs the jury that the killing of a human being without the authority of law and not in necessary self-defense, by any means or any manner is murder when done with deliberate design to effect the death of the person killed, or of any human being. The Court further instructs the jury that any person wilfully aiding, assisting or encouraging the commission of a felony is deemed and considered a principal as if he had with his own hand committed the entire offense. Therefore, if you find from the evidence, beyond a reasonable doubt, that on or about August 21, 1996, in the First Judicial District of Hinds County, Mississippi, Larry Donnell Simmons, a human being, was killed by another, without authority of law and not in necessary self-defense, by any means or any manner, and with deliberate design to effect the death of said Larry Donnell Simmons, and you further finds [sic] from the evidence, beyond a reasonable doubt, that the defendant, Kenny Markcol Brown, wilfully aided, assisted or encouraged same, then the defendant, Kenny Markcol Brown, is guilty as charged as to Count 2 and it is your sworn duty to so find. If the State has failed to prove beyond a reasonable doubt any one of the above required elements of the offense of murder, then it is your sworn duty to find the defendant, Kenny Markcol Brown, "not guilty" as to Count 2.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“When an informer or other agent generally acting in concert with law enforcement authorities, furnishes a defendant with heroin for the purpose of arranging a sale of the heroin by the defendant to an undercover officer, which sale was then consummated, defendant was entrapped as a matter of law, even though predisposition to commit the crime may appear and notwithstanding that the furnishing of the heroin was unknown to and contrary to the instructions of the law enforcement authorities.”
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.