Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 220 N.C. App. 1 - State v. Jackson

220 N.C. App. 1 - State v. Jackson’s Empirical Analysis

2012

Citation profile

11
cited by 11 later decisions
1
states following
May 2019
most recently cited

11 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Illinois v. Gates · Franks v. Delaware · Aguilar v. Texas · Spinelli v. United States

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

  1. “[i]f the issues raised by Defendant's challenge to [the trial court's] decision to deny his motion for appropriate relief are primarily legal rather than factual in nature, we will essentially use a de novo standard of review in evaluating Defendant's challenges to [the court's] order.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “(c) Hearings, Showing of Prejudice; Findings.- (1) Any party is entitled to a hearing on questions of law or fact arising from the motion and any supporting or opposing information presented unless the court determines that the motion is without merit. The court must determine, on the basis of these materials and the requirements of this subsection, whether an evidentiary hearing is required to resolve questions of fact. Upon the motion of either party, the judge may direct the attorneys for the parties to appear before him for a conference on any prehearing matter in the case. ... (3) The court must determine the motion without an evidentiary hearing when the motion and supporting and opposing information present only questions of law. The defendant has no right to be present at such a hearing where only questions of law are to be argued.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “Under subsection (c)(4) [of N.C. Gen.Stat. § 15A-1420 ], read in pari materia with subsections (c)(1), (c)(2), and (c)(3), an evidentiary hearing is required unless the motion presents assertions of fact which will entitle the defendant to no relief even if resolved in his favor, or the motion presents only questions of law. Thus, the ultimate question that must be addressed in determining whether a motion for appropriate relief should be summarily denied is whether the information contained in the record and presented in the defendant's motion for appropriate relief would suffice, if believed, to support an award of relief.”
    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.