887 So. 2d 158 - Gray v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 15 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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Next, Gray argues generically that the alleged preceding errors, taken as a whole, deprived him of a fair trial. This Court has previously held that "where there is `no reversible error' in any part, . . . there is no reversible error to the whole." Byrom v. State, 863 So.2d 836, 847 (Miss.2003) (quoting McFee v. State, 511 So.2d 130, 136 (Miss.1987)). Since Gray has not yet shown any actual error by the trial court, there can be no cumulative effect and no adverse impact upon his constitutional right to fair trial. This issue is without merit.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Scott v. State · Caleb Corrothers v. State of Mississippi

2. “(1) that the group alleged to be excluded is a `distinctive' group in the community; (2) that the representation of this group in venires from which juries are selected is not fair and reasonable in relation to the number of such persons in the community; and (3) that this underrepresentation is due to systematic exclusion of the group in the jury-selection process.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 904 So. 2d 149 - Jones v. State · 934 So. 2d 983 - Haynes v. State

3. “[t]he failure to present a case in mitigation during the sentencing phase of a capital trial is not, per se, ineffective assistance of counsel.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 945 So. 2d 326 - Howard v. State · Havard v. State