State v. Mackey’s Empirical Analysis
2000
Citation profile
2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
October 2000
most recently cited
2 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on State v. Chapman · State v. Mitchell · 99 N.C. App. 658 - State v. Huang · 116 N.C. App. 445 - State v. Brown · 135 N.C. App. 682 - State v. Bowers
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The only purpose for admitting the proposed testimony was to challenge the undercover procedures used by Manning in obtaining the drugs from the defendant. However, the record already contained evidence that Manning used the drugs from the buys and evidence regarding the procedures used in the undercover drug operation. The jury had the ability, on its own, to assess Manning’s credibility given this evidence.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. MacKey“If scientific, technical or other specialized knowledge will assist the trier of fact to understand the evidence or to determine a fact in issue, a witness qualified as an expert by knowledge, skill, experience, training, or education, may testify thereto in the form of an opinion.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. MacKey
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.