Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 170 N.C. App. 593 - State v. Prentice

170 N.C. App. 593 - State v. Prentice’s Empirical Analysis

2005

Citation profile

5
cited by 5 later decisions
2
states following
April 2025
most recently cited

5 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently April 2025

5 state decisions

30200520102020decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on United States v. Mauro · New York v. Hill · Alabama v. Bozeman · State v. Stager · State v. Cannon

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

  1. “[There are] three significant areas of inquiry for a court reviewing the foundation for admissibility of a videotape: (1) whether the camera and taping system in question were properly maintained and were properly operating when the tape was made, (2) whether the videotape accurately presents the events depicted, and (3) whether there is an unbroken chain of custody.”
    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.