147 N.C. App. 386 - State v. Carpenter’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

18 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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Though she did not specifically cite supporting texts, articles, or data, [the expert witness] testified on voir dire that she was basing her conclusions on literature, journal articles, training, and her experience. Thus, a proper foundation was established for her opinion testimony. In her testimony, [the expert witness] explained general characteristics of children who have been abused. [The expert witness] testified that an abused child often delays disclosing the abuse and offered various reasons an abused child would continue to cooperate with an abuser. [The expert witness] did not testify as to her opinion with respect to [the victim's] credibility. Evidence similar to that offered by [the expert witness] has been held admissible to assist the jury. See State v. Bailey , 89 N.C. App. 212 , 365 S.E.2d 651 (1988) (finding expert testimony as to why a child would cooperate with adult who had been sexually abusing child admissible); State v. Richardson , 112 N.C. App. 58 , 434 S.E.2d 657 (1993), disc. review denied , 335 N.C. 563 , 441 S.E.2d 132 (1994) (concluding trial court did not err in admitting testimony describing general symptoms and characteristics of sexually abused children to explain the victim's behavior); State v. Bowman , 84 N.C. App. 238 , 352 S.E.2d 437 (1987) (holding trial court was proper in admitting a doctor's testimony that a delay between the occurrence of an incident of child sexual abuse and the child's revelation of the incident was the usual p”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 258 N.C. App. 660 - State v. Shore · 255 N.C. App. 420 - State v. Shore

2. “delayed and incomplete disclosures are not unusual in cases of child abuse[.]”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 258 N.C. App. 660 - State v. Shore · 255 N.C. App. 420 - State v. Shore

3. “[A] trial court is afforded wide latitude in applying [North Carolina Rule of Evidence] 702 and will be reversed only for an abuse of discretion.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 242 N.C. App. 222 - State v. Purcell