549 So. 2d 949 - Keyes v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
34 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently April 2017 · most notably 650 So. 2d 1289 - MacK v. State (1994), 607 So. 2d 1184 - Wallace v. State (1992)
34 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 Perkins v. State · 451 So. 2d 213 - Seely v. State · Atkins v. State · Walker v. Walker · 410 So. 2d 1332 - Adams 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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[W]here the defendant enters a plea of guilty, nothing in [Rule 6.04(3)] mandates a separate hearing. The rule provides only that, after entry of the plea, "a hearing ... will then be conducted." * * * * * * Where the defendant pleads not guilty and goes to trial, the reason for a separate hearing is to preclude jury knowledge of prior convictions, except as otherwise admissible. See Rule 609, Miss. R.Ev. This reason does not obtain at sentencing, for the law strongly encourages, if it does not direct, the sentencing judge to become wholly familiar with the defendant's prior record before passing sentence.... That ... [the defendant was sentenced] at the same hearing where his guilty plea was accepted rather than at a separate hearing is of no moment.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Crouch v. State · Small v. State“Under these circumstances, we find beyond peradventure that Keyes' status as an habitual offender was established at the time his sentences were imposed. That this was done at the same hearing where his guilty plea was accepted rather than at a separate hearing is of no moment. The cases upon which Keyes relies Young [, 507 So.2d 48 (Miss.1987)], Bandy [, 495 So.2d 486 (Miss.1986)], DeBussi [, 453 So.2d 1030 (Miss.1984)], and Seely v. State, 451 So.2d 213 (Miss.1984) all involve the situation where an offender has been found guilty before a jury and thereafter a separate non-jury hearing is held on the question of habitual offender status. Those cases hardly stand for the proposition that a separate habitual offender hearing must be held upon a guilty plea. Indeed, this would be the ultimate in exalting form over substance.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“2. Separate trials shall be held on the principal charge and on the charge of previous convictions. In the trial on the principal charge, the previous conviction will not be mentioned by the state or the court except as provided by the Mississippi Rules of Evidence. 3. If the defendant is convicted or enters a plea of guilty on the principal charge, a hearing before the court without a jury will then be conducted on the previous convictions.”
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.