497 So. 2d 440 - Robinson v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
26 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently May 2019 · most notably 575 So. 2d 16 - MacKbee v. State (1990), 606 So. 2d 1132 - Parker v. State (1992)
26 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 451 So. 2d 743 - Neal v. State · 435 So. 2d 645 - Leatherwood v. State · 351 So. 2d 1342 - Gray v. State · 472 So. 2d 363 - Lancaster v. State · Tolbert 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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(b) Other Crimes, Wrongs, or Acts. Evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is not admissible to prove the character of a person in order to show that he acted in conformity therewith. It may, however, be admissible for other purposes such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“The reason for the rule is to preclude the State from raising the "forbidden inferential sequence," that the accused has committed other crimes and is therefore more likely to be guilty of the offense charged. Lancaster v. State, 472 So.2d 363 (Miss. 1985); Davis v. State, 377 So.2d 1076 (Miss. 1979). Grounded in the rule's purpose are exceptions. Evidence of another offense is admissible when offered, not to show the accused's criminal tendencies, but instead to prove identity, knowledge, intent, common criminal scheme or plan, or absence of mistake.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“a single transaction or closely related series of transactions in relation to the crime charged.”
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.