Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 224 NCAPP 337 - State v. Franklin

State v. Franklin’s Empirical Analysis

2012

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
1
states following
June 2019
most recently cited

3 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Brendlin v. California · In Re the Appeal From the Civil Penalty · State v. Boone · State v. Horner · 153 N.C. App. 69 - State v. Pimental

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

  1. “All of defendant’s issues on appeal are concerning his motion to suppress, but since defendant did not file a notice of appeal from the judgment or after entry of the written order denying his motion to suppress, we must first address whether we have jurisdiction to consider defendant’s appeal. In Miller, this Court stated, N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-979(b) (2009) states that: An order finally denying a motion to suppress evidence may be reviewed upon an appeal from a judgment of conviction, including a judgment entered upon a plea of guilty. Defendant has failed to appeal from the judgment of conviction and our Court does not have jurisdiction to consider Défendant’s appeal. In North Carolina, a defendant’s right to pursue an appeal from a criminal conviction is a creation of state statute. Notice of intent to appeal prior to plea bargain finalization is a rule designed to promote a fair posture for appeal from a guilty plea. Notice of Appeal is a procedural appellate rule, required in order to give this Court jurisdiction to hear and decide a case. Although Defendant preserved his right to appeal by filing his written notice of intent to appeal from the denial of his motion to suppress, he failed to appeal from his final judgment, as required by N.C.G.S. § 15A-979(b). Accordingly, the Court dismissed defendant’s appeal. Here, however, while defendant has not properly provided notice of appeal, he has petitioned this Court for a writ of certiorari to consider his appeal. North Ca”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “III. Standard of Review Our review of a trial court’s denial of a motion to suppress is strictly limited to determining whether the trial judge’s underlying findings of fact are supported by competent evidence, in which event they are conclusively binding on appeal, and whether those factual findings in turn support the judge’s ultimate conclusions of law. The trial court’s conclusions of law are fully reviewable on appeal.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “The trial court's conclusions of law are reviewed de novo [.]”
    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.