911 So. 2d 658 - Jim v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The Mississippi Legislature created the drug courts in part to “reduce the alcohol-related and [other] drug-related court workload.” Miss.Code Ann. § 9-23-3. However, the Code intentionally refrained from creating a right by expressly stating, “A person does not have a right to participate in drug court under this chapter.” Miss.Code Ann. § 9-23-15(4). Thus, [the defendant] does not have a right to transfer his case to drug court nor does he have a[n] equal protection claim since no one has the right to attend the drug court.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 25 So. 3d 404 - Phillips v. State

2. “In reviewing the denial of a motion to suppress, this Court looks to determine whether the trial court's findings, considering the totality of the circumstances, are supported by substantial credible evidence.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 973 So. 2d 254 - Randolph v. State

3. “Where supported by substantial credible evidence, this Court shall not disturb those findings.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 973 So. 2d 254 - Randolph v. State