Langston v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2001
Citation profile
46
cited by 46 later decisions
2
states following
May 2018
most recently cited
46 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on McClain v. State · 503 So. 2d 803 - Wetz v. State · 440 So. 2d 297 - Groseclose v. State · 691 So. 2d 948 - Herring v. State · 454 So. 2d 445 - Billiot 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 46 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“This Court does not have the task of re-weighing the facts in each case to, in effect, go behind the jury to detect whether the testimony and evidence they chose to believe was or was not the most credible.”
11 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Towner v. State · Smith v. State“Jurors are permitted, indeed have the duty, to resolve the conflicts in the testimony they hear. They may believe or disbelieve, accept or reject the utterances of any witness. No formula dictates the manner in which jurors resolve conflicting testimony into finding of fact sufficient to support their verdict. That resolution results from the jurors hearing and observing the witnesses as they testify, augmented by the composite reasoning of twelve individuals sworn to return a true verdict. A reviewing court cannot and need not determine with exactitude which witness or what testimony the jury believed or disbelieved in arriving at its verdict. It is enough that the conflicting evidence presented a factual dispute for jury resolution.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Towner v. State · Bounds v. State“[i]t is the duty of the trial court to assess whether the question asked of the juror was '(1) relevant to the voir dire examination; (2) whether it was unambiguous; and (3) whether the juror had substantial knowledge of the information sought to be elicited.' " Langston , 791 So.2d at 281 (¶ 19) (quoting Odom v. State , 355 So.2d 1381 , 1383 (Miss. 1978) ). "If the court finds that these inquiries point unequivocally to the fault of the juror, it then must ask whether there was prejudice to the defendant resulting from the juror's failure to respond accurately to a voir dire question.”
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.