191 N.C. App. 680 - State v. Canady’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 5 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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “A person violates this statute if he intentionally, without legal excuse or justification, discharges a firearm into an occupied building with knowledge that the building is then occupied by one or more persons or when he has reasonable grounds to believe that the building might be occupied by one or more persons. Furthermore, our Supreme Court has stated that [d]ischarging a firearm into a vehicle does not require that the State prove any specific intent but only that the defendant perform[ed] the act which is forbidden by statute. It is a general intent crime.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 244 N.C. App. 102 - State v. Bryant

2. “the plain meaning of “into” includes “against” as in “crashed into a tree.” This sentence does not mean “crashed through a tree.” Similarly, discharging a firearm “into” an enclosure does not have to mean “through” the wall of the enclosure.... The exterior wall is nonetheless a wall, which the bullet was fired against, thereby fulfilling the requirement of being fired “into” the enclosure.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 208 N.C. App. 406 - State v. Dubose

3. “irrelevant since the construction of the statute clearly shows that the intent element applies merely to the discharging, not to the eventual destination of the bullet.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 244 N.C. App. 102 - State v. Bryant