999 So. 2d 393 - Flaggs v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2008
Citation profile
4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 863 So. 2d 31 - Mississippi Transp. Comm'n v. McLemore · 437 So. 2d 19 - Box v. State · 705 So. 2d 307 - Holland v. State · 954 So. 2d 968 - Ross v. State · 533 So. 2d 418 - Woodward 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.
“To the extent that any juror, because of his relationship to one of the parties, his occupation, his past experience, or whatever, would normally lean in favor of one of the parties, or be biased against the other, or one’s claim or the other’s defense in the lawsuit, to this extent, of course, his ability to be fair and impartial is impaired. It should also be borne in mind that jurors take their oaths and responsibilities seriously, and when a prospective juror assures the court that, despite the circumstance that raises some question as to his qualification, this will not affect his verdict, this promise is entitled to considerable deference.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Townes v. State“To meet the requirement of reliability, an expert’s testimony must be based on the methods and procedures of science, and not merely on subjective beliefs or unsupported speculation. Rule 702 expressly allows expert testimony regarding non-scientific matters, so long as the witness’s knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education qualify him as an expert in a given field, and (1) the testimony is based upon sufficient facts or data; (2) the testimony is the product of reliable principles and methods; and (3) the witness has applied the principles and methods reliably to the facts of the ease.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[T]he State [is not required] to test every item of evidence collected.”
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.