State v. Anderson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

41 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 45 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Nor was there error in the court’s instruction to the jury that the testimony of the defendants and their near relatives who went upon the stand and testified in their behalf should be scrutinized with care in order to ascertain to what extent, if any, their testimony was warped or biased by their interest, adding, however, that if, after such scrutiny, they believed such witnesses, they would give the same credit to their testimony as if they were disinterested. S. v. Lee, 121 N.C., 544 , 28 S.E., 552 ; S. v. Deal, 207 N.C., 448 , 177 S.E., 332 . Again, the defendants complain because the trial court did not caution the jury, or instruct them, as to how the testimony of detectives and accomplices should be received and considered. S. v. Palmer, 178 N.C., 822 , 101 S.E., 506 . There was no request for such instruction, and the assignment is without exceptive basis. A similar contention was advanced and rejected in S. v. O’Neal, 187 N.C., 22 , 120 S.E., 817 . A like result must follow here.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Eakins