State v. . Locklear’s Empirical Analysis
1946
Citation profile
10 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently August 1986
10 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The defendant was charged with burglary in the first degree in the bill of indictment. And when the solicitor stated that he would not ask for a verdict of first degree burglary, but would only ask for a verdict of second degree burglary on the indictment, it was tantamount to taking a nolle prosequi with leave on the capital charge. S. v. Spain, 201 N.C., 571 , 160 S.E., 825 ; S. v. Hunt, 128 N.C., 584 , 38 S.E., 473 . In the case of S. v. Jordan, ante, 155, 37 S.E. (2d), 111 , Stacy, C.J., in speaking for the Court, said: ‘It is permissible under our practice to convict a defendant of a less degree of the crime charged, G.S. 15-170, or for which he is being tried, when there is evidence to support the milder verdict, S. v. Smith, 201 N.C., 494 , 160 S.E., 577 , with G.S., 15-171, available in burglary cases, S. v. McLean, 224 N.C., 704 , 32 S.E. (2d), 227 .’ But on this record there is no evidence to support a milder verdict. Moreover, when a nolle prosequi was taken as to the capital charge, there remained no charge in the bill of indictment to support a verdict of burglary in the second degree. The motion to set aside the verdict should have been sustained.””
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.