749 So. 2d 246 - Henley v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1999
Citation profile
19
cited by 19 later decisions
1
states following
January 2019
most recently cited
19 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Ohio v. Johnson · 666 So. 2d 767 - Cole v. State · Lee v. State · 669 So. 2d 44 - Williams v. State · 490 So. 2d 910 - Mann 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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Henley and his co-defendant not only committed armed robbery against the Pizza Hut restaurant, but also robbed five individuals, placing each of them in immediate fear of injury with a deadly weapon and depriving each of them of his or her personal property. Under these circumstances, Henley’s six count indictment charging six separate crimes of armed robbery against multiple victims, despite their common nucleus, is indicative of Henley’s intent to rob each person[,] and therefore, multiple convictions or counts for multiple victims do not violate Henley’s protection under double jeopardy.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Towner v. State · McDonald v. State“Failure by a prisoner to raise objections, defenses, claims, questions, issues, or errors either in fact or in law which were capable of determination at trial and/or on direct appeal, regardless of whether such are based on the laws and the Constitution of the state of Mississippi or of the United States, shall constitute a waiver thereof and shall be procedurally barred, but the court may upon a showing of cause and actual prejudice grant relief from the waiver.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“to provide prisoners with a procedure, limited in nature, to review those objections, defenses, claims, questions, issues or errors which in practical reality could not be or should not have been raised at trial or on direct appeal.”
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.