State v. . Smith’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

21 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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “While under certain circumstances it has been held by this Court competent for the defendant to introduce evidence tending to show that someone else than he committed the crime charged, S. v. Davis, 77 N.C., 483 , it is well settled that such evidence is not admissible unless it points directly to the guilt of the third party, evidence which does no more than create an inference or conjecture as to such guilt is inadmissible. ... To the same effect is Wharton’s Criminal Evidence (11th Ed.), Vol. 1, par. 274, p. 349, where it is said: “In any event, before such testimony can be received, there must be such proof of connection with the crime or such a train of facts or circumstances as tends to point out someone other than the accused as the guilty party. Remote acts, disconnected from and outside of the crime itself, cannot be separately proved for such a purpose.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Jenkins

2. “It must ordinarily be left to the jury to determine, from all the facts and circumstances, whether or not the ulterior criminal intent existed at the time of the breaking and entry.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 242 N.C. App. 385 - State v. Weeks

3. “Intent being a mental attitude, it must ordinarily be proven ... by circumstantial evidence, that is, by proving facts from which the fact sought to be proven may be inferred.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 242 N.C. App. 385 - State v. Weeks