863 So. 2d 63 - Williams v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

13 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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “In determining whether error lies in the manner in which the jury was instructed, the various requested instructions are not considered in isolation. Rather, the instructions actually given must be read as a whole.”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Williams v. State · 981 So. 2d 1007 - Brown v. State

2. “The standard[s] of review for peremptory instructions and directed verdicts are the same. In passing upon a request for a peremptory instruction, all evidence introduced by the State is to be accepted as true, together with any reasonable inferences that can be drawn from that evidence, and if sufficient evidence to support a verdict of guilty exists, the motion for a directed verdict is to be overruled. Mississippi law is clear on the subject of peremptory instructions in criminal cases: peremptory instructions should be refused if there is enough evidence to support a verdict. The court will reverse only when reasonable and fair-minded jurors could only find the accused not guilty.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Anderson v. State

3. “The Court instructs the jury that to make a killing justifiable on the grounds of self-defense, the danger to the defendant, or another human being, must be either actual, present and urgent, or the defendant must have reasonable grounds to believe that the victim intended to kill the defendant, or another human being, or to do him, or another human being, some great bodily harm,' and in addition to this, he must have reasonable grounds to believe that there is imminent danger of such act being accomplished. It is for the jury to determine the reasonableness of the grounds upon which the defendant acts.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. James John Rodgers v. State of Mississippi