Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 130 N.C. App. 356 - State v. Roope

130 N.C. App. 356 - State v. Roope’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

22
cited by 22 later decisions
1
states following
February 2012
most recently cited

22 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Bruton v. United States · Harrington v. California · Richardson v. Marsh · Gray v. Maryland · State v. Barnes

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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Overwhelming evidence of a defendant's guilt [without regard to the erroneously admitted evidence] may render a constitutional error harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “(1) When a defendant objects to joinder of charges against two or more defendants for trial because an out-of-court statement of a co-defendant makes reference to him but is not admissible against him, the court must require the prosecutor to select one of the following courses: a. A joint trial at which the statement is not admitted into evidence; or b. A joint trial at which the statement is admitted into evidence only after all references to the moving defendant have been effectively deleted so that the statement will not prejudice him; or c. A separate trial of the objecting defendant. (2) The court, ... on motion of the defendant other than under subdivision (1) above must deny a joinder for trial or grant a severance of defendants whenever: a. If before trial, it is found necessary to protect a defendant’s right to a speedy trial, or it is found necessary to promote a fair determination of the guilt or innocence of one or more defendants; or b. If during trial, upon motion of the defendant whose trial is to be severed, or motion of the prosecutor with the consent of the defendant whose trial is to be severed, it is found necessary to achieve a fair determination of the guilt or innocence of that defendant.”
    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.