540 So. 2d 1 - Wright v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 50 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 52 later decisions — most recently March 2018 · most notably 681 So. 2d 521 - Hoops v. State (1996), 749 So. 2d 110 - Floyd v. City of Crystal Springs (1999)
1 federal appellate · 50 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 503 So. 2d 803 - Wetz v. State · 460 So. 2d 778 - May v. State · 373 So. 2d 1042 - Gandy v. State · Lee v. State · 401 So. 2d 1100 - Hughes 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 52 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Absent unusual circumstances, where objection is sustained to improper questioning or testimony, and the jury is admonished to disregard the question or testimony, we will not find error”
10 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Brown v. State · McNeal v. State“[t]he appellants waived error, if any, in the court’s refusal to grant them a directed verdict at the close of the State’s case-in-chief when they proceeded to present evidence in their behalf. Because they did not renew this motion by way of a motion for a directed verdict at the conclusion of the evidence or via a motion for a peremptory instruction, any objection they may have had to the sufficiency of the evidence is waived.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“Double jeopardy protects criminal defendants from being exposed to more than one prosecution for the same offense. It does not protect a defendant against different prosecutions for different offenses. Hughes v. State, 401 So.2d 1100 (Miss.1981). It is not a legal analog to some sort of “blue light special” where a defendant, by having the foresight or good fortune to commit the same crime or different crimes in close connection to each other, gets two or more offenses for the price of one.”
2 later decisions 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.