Foster v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2005
Citation profile
8
cited by 8 later decisions
2
states following
May 2015
most recently cited
8 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Crenshaw v. State · Shearer v. State · 473 So. 2d 452 - Winters v. State · 656 So. 2d 1192 - Holland v. State · 632 So. 2d 936 - Brent 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 8 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a witness uses a writing, recording, or object to refresh his memory for the purpose of testifying. " M.R.E. Rule 612 (emphasis added). Professor Carolyn Stanton in Mississippi Evidence states: If, after looking at the writing . . ., the witness is able to testify without reading the writing, his recollection is said to be revived or refreshed. If, however, after examining the writing, his memory is not revived, the only way he may be able to testify is to read from the writing. Since the writing is an out-of-court statement, this usually creates a hearsay problem. Carolyn Stanton, Miss. Evidence § 612 (3rd ed.1995). Thus, any testimony Brown read from her prior statement is hearsay. "However, this Court will only reverse a trial court's decision to admit or exclude evidence if the trial court's decision prejudices a party's case.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. McDowell v. State“A motion for a new trial is addressed to the discretion of the trial court, and such motion should be considered with caution. The power to grant a new trial should be invoked only in exceptional cases in which the evidence preponderates heavily against the verdict. [Appellate courts] must weigh the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict and must therefore look at the evidence in the light most favorable to the State’s theory of the case. [Appellate courts] will disturb the verdict only when it is so contrary to the overwhelming weight of the evidence that to allow it to stand would sanction an unconscionable injustice.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Ford 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.