 |
|
 |
|
|
Access State and Federal Case Law, plus U.S. Supreme Court cases — for free!
Click on any of the case links below to view the full text of that case — for free — through lexisONE®, a legal research and news service from LexisNexis®. Login is required — registration is free!
While viewing the full text of the case, select from upgrade options to Shepardize® or view the fully-featured case on lexis.com including Core Terms, Shepard's® Signals, Case Summaries, Print Options, and more. lexisONE offers access to comprehensive content and flexible services for faster, more efficient legal research. Review our flexible LexisNexis® subscriptions offered through daily, weekly or monthly research packages.
| Edwards v. State, NO. 2005-CP-01693-COA,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSISSIPPI, January 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Pursuant to Miss. Code Ann. § 47-7-37, only the court had the authority to revoke probation; accordingly, the trial court properly exercised jurisdiction over defendant in revoking his post-release supervision, which was not unlawfully revoked. Defendant's other arguments were without merit.
|
|||||
| Hancock v. Watson, NO. 2005-IA-00413-COA,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSISSIPPI, January 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A remand was necessary in an alienation of affection case because the limited facts in the record made it impossible to determine if Mississippi or Tennessee law should have applied; moreover, the appellate court was also unable to determine when the cause of action accrued under the three-year statute of limitations in Miss. Code Ann. § 15-1-49.
|
|||||
| Laster v. State, NO. 2005-CA-01677-COA,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSISSIPPI, January 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Petitioner was properly denied postconviction relief after he pled guilty to two counts of sexual battery against child under age of 14 where his argument that his prosecution was barred by applicable statute of limitations, Miss. Code Ann. § 99-1-5, was barred; petitioner's plea was voluntarily given and statute of limitations defense was waived.
|
|||||
| Staggs v. State, NO. 2005-CA-01579-COA,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSISSIPPI, January 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Petitioner's motion for postconviction relief was properly dismissed without evidentiary hearing where trial court complied with Miss. Unif. Cir. & Cty. R. 8.04 by ascertaining that her guilty plea to sexual battery was voluntarily and intelligently entered; she was fully informed that trial court could impose the maximum penalty of 30 years.
|
|||||
| Wilkerson v. Wilkerson, NO. 2005-CA-01382-COA,
COURT OF APPEALS OF MISSISSIPPI, January 9, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: A finding that dental braces were not necessary medical expenses in a father's petition for clarification of his child support obligations was inappropriate because a doctor's testimony established that the braces were needed for medical reasons. Thus, the father was liable for payment of all medical expenses related to the braces.
|
|||||
| Fitch v. Valentine, NO. 2006-CA-00239-SCT,
SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI, January 11, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Judgment was entered against judgment debtor in a suit brought by judgment creditor. Circuit court properly determined that it lacked jurisdiction to cancel judgment because its order simply substituted letter of credit in lieu of supersedeas bond, and under Miss. Code Ann. § 11-7-189(2), only judgment creditor could remove judgment from rolls.
|
|||||
| Franklin Collection Serv. v. Kyle, NO. 2005-IA-00988-SCT,
SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI, January 11, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: In collection agency's suit on open account against patient, trial court erred in not granting collection agency's and medical services provider's motions for summary judgment on counterclaim of breach of patient-physician privilege because information that was attached to collection agency's complaint was not privileged under Miss. R. Evid. 503.
|
|||||
| Guice v. State, NO. 2004-CT-01931-SCT,
SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI, January 11, 2007, Decided
View this case - free |
|||||
Overview: Defendant was convicted of aggravated assault. Defendant's argument that speedy trial right, pursuant to Miss. Code Ann. § 99-17-1, was violated was rejected because even as late as day of trial defendant did not demand speedy trial; defendant demanded dismissal. Delay was partially caused by defendant's unwillingness to cooperate with counsel.
|
|||||
Back to Top
| www.lexisnexis.com | About LexisNexis | Terms & Conditions | Customer Support | Sitemap | Contact Us |
| CopyrightŠ 2008 LexisNexis® All rights reserved. |
