910 So. 2d 651 - Hampton v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2005
Citation profile
4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
April 2011
most recently cited
4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 451 So. 2d 743 - Neal v. State · 805 So. 2d 452 - Simmons v. State · 737 So. 2d 322 - Puckett v. State · 823 So. 2d 473 - Caston v. State · Smith 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The authority to declare a mistrial is left largely to the sound discretion of the trial court. Pulphus v. State, 782 So.2d 1220 (¶10) (Miss.2001). Within this authority is the discretion to determine whether the objectionable comment is so prejudicial that a mistrial should be de- dared. Edmond v. State, 312 So.2d 702, 706 (Miss.1975). Furthermore, when the trial court instructs the jury, we must assume that the panel followed the instruction. Puckett v. State, 737 So.2d 322 (¶72) (Miss.1999). In this case, the trial court decided to eliminate all of White's testimony since White had only testified as to his pursuit and arrest of Hampton. The trial court admonished the jury to disregard White’s testimony, and we find no abuse of discretion in doing so.”
1 later decision 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.