State v. Ryan’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Under our plain error review, we must consider whether the erroneous admission of expert testimony that impermissibly bolstered the victim's credibility had the prejudicial effect necessary to establish that the error was a fundamental error. This Court has held that it is fundamental to a fair trial that a witness's credibility be determined by a jury, that expert opinion on the credibility of a witness is inadmissible, and that the admission of such testimony is prejudicial when the State's case depends largely on the testimony of the prosecuting witness. Notably, a review of relevant case law reveals that [ (1) ] where the evidence is fairly evenly divided, or [ (2) ] where the evidence consists largely of the child victim's testimony and testimony by corroborating witnesses with minimal physical evidence, especially where the defendant has put on rebuttal evidence , the error is generally found to be prejudicial, even on plain error review, since the expert's opinion on the victim's credibility likely swayed the jury's decision in favor of finding the defendant guilty of a sexual assault charge.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 249 N.C. App. 395 - State v. Crabtree

2. “Q. [H]ave you ever diagnosed or made a finding that [a] child is not being truthful? A. I have done that on several occasions. Q. Can you explain to the jurors what you look for, the clues that you look for, and do you do that in every case? A. I do it in every case. .... Q. Was there anything about your examination of [the child] that gave you any concerns in this regard? A. That gave me concerns that she was giving a fictitious story? Q. Yes. A. Nothing. There was nothing about the evaluation which led me to have those concerns. And again, as I was getting into her history and considering this as a possibility, nothing came out.”

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

3. “the State's evidence consisted of testimony from the child, her family members, her therapist, the lead detective on the case who was an acquaintance of the family, and an expert witness. All of the State's evidence relied in whole or in part on the child's statements concerning the alleged sexual abuse. ... There was no testimony presented by the State that did not have as its origin the accusations of the child . For this reason, the credibility of the child was central to the State's case.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 249 N.C. App. 395 - State v. Crabtree