802 So. 2d 137 - Evans v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 state decisions

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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Michael Wayne Williams is indicted in 06-0-072 with three counts, count one armed robbery, count two kidnapping and count three possession of a firearm by a convicted felon. In order for the State to be able to prove that he has a possession of a firearm by a convicted felon, they obviously have to prove he is a convicted felon. His prior felony conviction is for armed robbery, and our contention is that to allow them to go forward with count three in the same trial as count one and two would be extremely prejudicial because he's convicted of armed robbery, and he's on trial for armed robbery in this case. We're moving under Rule 9.03 of the Uniform Circuit and Chancery Court Rules, and, as I have said previously, I do not know what the interplay is between Mississippi Code 99-7-2 and Uniform Circuit and Chancery Court Rule 7.07. Of course, those are the rules that allow for multi-count indictments. And we are not saying that this indictment is defective in any way. I don't think we even need a Corley hearing. We admit that these transactions are interwoven. I could not find a single case where our Supreme Court or Court of Appeals has made any pronouncement about how 9.03 is to interact with 99-7-2 and 7.07. But Rule 9.03 says that the Court may grant a severance of offenses when if before trial it is deemed appropriate to promote a fair determination of the defendant's guilt or innocence of each offense. And our contention is that the jury will not be able to fairly determi”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 991 So. 2d 593 - Williams v. State