Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 216 N.C. App. 54 - State v. Burgess

216 N.C. App. 54 - State v. Burgess’s Empirical Analysis

2011

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
1
states following
November 2018
most recently cited

12 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 175 N.C. App. 250 - State v. Hanton · 164 N.C. App. 298 - State v. Morgan · 130 N.C. App. 113 - State v. Rich · State v. Wall · 167 N.C. App. 575 - State v. Jeffery

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

  1. “[T]he State's reliance on State v. Hamby for its contention that defendant cannot raise issues related to his sentence on appeal because he stipulated to his prior record level and agreed to his sentence in his plea agreement is misplaced. This Court has repeatedly held a defendant's stipulation to the substantial similarity of offenses from another jurisdiction is ineffective because the issue of whether an offense from another jurisdiction is substantially similar to a North Carolina offense is a question of law.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, a conviction occurring in a jurisdiction other than North Carolina is classified as a Class I felony if the jurisdiction in which the offense occurred classifies the offense as a felony.... If the State proves by the preponderance of the evidence that an offense classified as either a misdemeanor or a felony in the other jurisdiction is substantially similar to an offense in North Carolina that is classified as a Class I felony or higher, the conviction is treated as that class of felony for assigning prior record level points.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “We emphasize that “copies of the . . . statutes from another jurisdiction, and comparison of their provisions to the criminal laws of North Carolina, are sufficient to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the crimes of which defendant was convicted in those states were substantially similar to classified crimes in North Carolina for purposes of G.S. § 15A-1340.14(e).””
    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.