Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 64 MISS 201 - Lea v. State

Lea v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1886

Citation profile

9
cited by 9 later decisions
2
states following
October 2005
most recently cited

9 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently October 2005

9 state decisions

401886189019001910192019301940195019601970198019902000decided

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 Ex parte Phillips · Murphy 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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““There is no merit in the objection made to the indictment that it is double, because it alleges in the same count that both vinous and spirituous liquors were sold. The selling of one or both, as charged, was criminal.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.