136 N.C. App. 394 - State v. Grady’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

21 state decisions

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

1. ““As noted above, although defendant’s counsel presented argument on a single assignment of-error, he also requested this Court to conduct, pursuant to An-ders, a ‘full examination of the record on appeal for possible prejudicial error ... to determine whether any justiciable issue has been overlooked.’ Counsel acknowledged he was ‘unable to identify any additional issues with sufficient merit to support meaningful argument for relief on appeal.’ Anders applies only where ‘counsel finds his case to be wholly frivolous, after a conscientious examination,’ and submits to the appellate court a brief, ‘referring to anything in the record that might arguably support the appeal,’ with the request that the court conduct an independent review to ascertain possible prejudice. Anders, 386 U.S. at 744 , 87 S.Ct. at 1400 , 18 L.Ed.2d at 498 . In addition, counsel must advise the defendant that he or she has the right to file written arguments with the appeals court, and counsel must provide the defendant with any necessary documents. See State v. Dayberry, 131 N.C.App. 406, 408 , 507 S.E.2d 587, 589 (1998). “The combination of an argued assignment of error coupled .with a request for review pursuant to Anders presents an inconsistent and effectively hybrid appeal that is improper and subject to dismissal by this Court. An Anders brief is based on the ‘conclusion that the appeal is toholly frivolous,’ State v. Kinch, 314 N.C. 99, 102 , 331 S.E.2d 665, 666 (1985) (emphasis added), and that ”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 201 So. 3d 623 - Hammond v. State

2. “A continuing offense ... is a breach of the criminal law not terminated by a single act or fact, but which subsists for a definite period and is intended to cover or apply to successive similar obligations or occurrences.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 253 N.C. App. 563 - State v. Maloney

3. “[I]f an indictment contains an averment unnecessary to charge the offense, such averment may be disregarded as inconsequential surplusage.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 183 N.C. App. 158 - State v. Overby