Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 906 SO2D 760 - Shanks v. State

Shanks v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2004

Citation profile

9
cited by 9 later decisions
2
states following
March 2015
most recently cited

9 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 553 So. 2d 505 - Fleming v. State · 752 So. 2d 452 - Walton v. State · Kemp 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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “A prisoner who has filed a proper motion pursuant to this Act, and whose motion has withstood summary dismissal under § 99-39-11(2), may be entitled to trial transcripts or other relevant documents under the discovery provisions of § 99-39-15, upon good cause shown and in the discretion of the trial judge. If the prisoner's request for transcripts or other documents is denied, and his overall petition is ultimately denied, then he may appeal the denial of his petition for collateral relief pursuant to § 99-39-25[,] which provides that final judgments entered under the Act may be reviewed by this Court on appeal brought by either the State or the prisoner. Within that appeal, the prisoner may include the claim that the denial of his request for transcripts or other documents was error.... However, nothing in the Uniform Post-Conviction Collateral Relief Act or elsewhere gives a prisoner the right to institute an independent, original action for a free transcript or other documents, and then if dissatisfied with the trial court's ruling, to directly appeal that ruling to this [c]ourt as a separate and independent action. Fleming did not file his request for free transcript and other documents as part of a motion under the Act for post-conviction collateral relief, nor is this claim raised as part of a direct appeal from conviction. Therefore, this appeal should be dismissed due to a lack of jurisdiction.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “There are two primary ways a criminal defendant may challenge a trial court proceeding: a direct appeal from conviction under Miss.Code Ann. § 99-35-101 (Rev.2002) or a proceeding under the Post-Conviction Collateral Relief Act, Miss.Code Ann. §§ 99-39-1 to 29 (Rev. 2000 & Supp.2004).”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “Any person convicted of an offense in a circuit court may appeal to the Supreme Court. However, where the defendant enters a plea of guilty and is sentenced, then no appeal from the circuit court to the Supreme Court shall be allowed.”
    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.