177 N.C. App. 73 - State v. Cromartie’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

15 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 15 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[w]here [a] defendant points a gun at the victim and pulls the trigger, this constitutes evidence from which intent to kill may be inferred.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Boyd · 195 N.C. App. 460 - State v. Braddy

2. “Here, defense counsel did not expressly state that he had seen the prior record level worksheet; however, we find it telling that he specifically directed the trial court to refer to the worksheet to establish that defendant had no prior felony convictions. Defense counsel specifically stated that "up until this particular case he had no felony convictions, as you can see from his worksheet." This statement indicates not only that defense counsel was cognizant of the contents of the worksheet, but also that he had no objections to it. Defendant, by arguing that his trial counsel did not stipulate to his previous misdemeanor conviction, simply seeks to have his cake and eat it too. If defense counsel's affirmative statement with respect to defendant's lack of previous felony convictions was proper, then so too was the implicit statement that defendant's previous misdemeanor convictions were properly reflected on the worksheet in question.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 249 N.C. App. 101 - State v. Jester

3. “[T]rial counsel acknowledged the worksheet by making specific reference to it.... Then counsel proceeded to use the information contained in the worksheet to minimize defendant's prior record as being 'nonviolent.' Finally, at no time did trial counsel dispute any of the convictions on the worksheet. As our Supreme Court held in Alexander , defendant cannot "have his cake and eat it too." Defendant cannot use the worksheet during his sentencing hearing to seek a lesser sentence and then have his appellate counsel disavow this conduct on appeal in order to obtain a new sentencing hearing.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 249 N.C. App. 101 - State v. Jester