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.
	State Courts - Mississippi - March 23, 2006
	Hobgood v. State, NO. 2004-KA-01917-SCT, SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI, March 23, 2006, Decided View this case - free   Overview: In sexual battery of child case, grandmother, babysitter, psychotherapist, and doctor were not working in connection with the police. Further, their statements were not made for the purpose of aiding in the prosecution. Thus, their statements did not violate Confrontation Clause under U.S. Const. amends. VI and XIV and Miss. Const. art. III, § 26. Search Cases for Free | Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers | Case Summary Email Service - 50% off
	Johnson v. State, NO. 2003-CT-00487-SCT, SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI, March 23, 2006, Decided View this case - free   Overview: Defendant's sentence of 15 years in prison, with seven years to be served by actual incarceration, and eight years to be suspended and served by way of post-release supervision under Miss. Code Ann. § 47-7-34, with five of the eight years to be served with "probation-like" terms, under Miss. Code Ann. §§ 47-7-34, 47-7-35, was valid. Search Cases for Free | Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers | Case Summary Email Service - 50% off
	Liebling v. Miss. Bar, NO. 2004-BA-01565-SCT, SUPREME COURT OF MISSISSIPPI, March 23, 2006, Decided View this case - free   Overview: The Mississippi Complaint Tribunal did not err in excluding letters from client to attorney as they were hearsay and were not admissible under Miss. R. Evid. 801(d)(1)(B). Mississippi Bar established that attorney violated Miss. R. Prof. Conduct 8.4(a) and (c). Tribunal did not err in imposing public reprimand given attorney's prior violations. Search Cases for Free | Daily, Weekly or Monthly Research Subscription Offers | Case Summary Email Service - 50% off
	Back to Top
	www.lexisnexis.com |  About LexisNexis |  Terms & Conditions |  Customer Support |  Sitemap |  Contact Us   CopyrightŠ 2008  LexisNexis®  All rights reserved.