921 So. 2d 275 - Mixon v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2005

Citation profile

cited by 9 later decisions

states following

August 2016

most recently cited

9 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 440 So. 2d 297 - Groseclose v. State · 681 So. 2d 521 - Hoops v. State · 445 So. 2d 798 - Williams v. State · 428 So. 2d 1361 - Pearson v. State · 606 So. 2d 1132 - Parker 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.

“COMMON SCHEME OR PLAN This multi-count indictment is pursuant to Section 99-7-2 of the Mississippi Code of 1972, as amended in that the individual counts are part of a Common Scheme or Plan, are similar or same acts, close in time and with the same primary witnesses. COUNT ONE Between the dates of July 23, 2010 and July 26, 2010, in Lamar County, Mississippi, the defendant, Marshall Graves, being then and there a male person above the age of eighteen (18) years, to-wit: forty-five (45) years, with the defendant’s date of birth being June 22, 1965, did willfully, unlawfully and felo-niously and for the purpose of gratifying his lust or indulging his depraved licentious sexual desires, handle, touch or rub with his hand the breasts of G.W., a child under the age of sixteen (16) years, to-wit: ten (10) years of age, whose date of birth is September 21, 1999, contrary to and in violation of Section 97-5-23(1) of the Mississippi Code of 1972, as amended; against the peace and dignity of the State of Mississippi, and, COUNT THREE Between the dates of July 30, 2010 and August 1, 2010, in Lamar County, Mis sissippi, the defendant, Marshall Graves, being then and there a male person above the age of eighteen (18) years, to-wit: forty-five (45) years, with the defendant’s date of birth being June 22, 1965, did willfully, unlawfully and felo-niously and for the purpose of gratifying his lust or indulging his depraved licentious sexual desires, handle, touch or rub with his penis the vag”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
e.g. Graves v. State
“an accused person is entitled to be confronted with and have opportunity to cross-examine witnesses against him”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
e.g. 947 So. 2d 279 - Outerbridge v. State
“change[s] the charge made in the indictment to another crime”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
e.g. 956 So. 2d 281 - Cridiso v. State

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.