197 N.C. App. 78 - State v. Miller’s Empirical Analysis
2009
Citation profile
30 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently February 2022 · most notably 215 N.C. App. 144 - State v. Castaneda (2011), 243 N.C. App. 628 - State v. Hicks (2015)
30 state decisions
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 Crawford v. Washington · Francis v. Franklin · Henderson v. Kibbe · State v. Odom · California v. Curry
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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The questions and their answers were relevant to facts under dispute. In addition, here, the questions gave context to defendant’s responses. . . . [D]uring the course of questioning, defendant eventually conceded to the truth of many of the statements relayed to him via the detectives’ questions. The circumstances under which these concessions were made were rélevant to understanding the concessions themselves and therefore to the subject matter of the case. At other times, after being confronted with the purported statements of others via the detectives’ questions, defendant changed his story substantially. In these instances, the questions were also relevant to explain and provide context to defendant’s subsequent conduct of changing his story.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Garcia · State v. Cole“[i]n criminal cases, every circumstance that is calculated to throw any light upon the supposed crime is admissible. In order to be relevant, ... evidence need not bear directly on the question in issue if it is helpful to understand the conduct of the parties, their motives, or if it reasonably allows the jury to draw an inference as to a disputed fact. The value of the evidence need only be slight. In addition, ... [e]ven though a trial court's rulings on relevancy technically are not discretionary ... such rulings are given great deference on appeal.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“The exclusion of evidence under Rule 403 is a matter generally left to the sound discretion of the trial court, which is left undisturbed unless the trial court's ruling is manifestly unsupported by reason or is so arbitrary it could not have been the result of a reasoned decision.”
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.