State v. Sears’s Empirical Analysis
1952
Citation profile
24 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently December 2011
24 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.
Relationships
Relies on State v. . Sullivan · State v. . Wooten · State v. . Vick · State v. Sumner · State v. . Fulcher
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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““. . . Exception is taken to the manner in which the verdict of the jury was received. “The record shows that: ‘The jury retired and subsequently returned into the court and when asked by the Clerk how they found, the answer was “Guilty as charged;” whereupon the court stated to the jury that the charge in the bill of indictment was that of rape, which is the capital felony, and that, as explained in his charge to the jury, the Solicitor was not asking for a Verdict of “Guilty of Rape” but for a verdict of “Guilty of Assault with Intent to Commit Rape”; and the court inquired of the jury if that was the verdict which they intended to render, that is to say, “Guilty of assault with intent to commit rape,” whereupon the jurors all nodded their Heads in acquiescence and the foreman stated, “That is our verdict, guilty of assault with intent to commit rape.” The verdict was accepted by the court and enrolled upon the Minutes of the Court of the Term.’ “We hold that the manner of receiving the verdict is unobjectionable. This Court so held in S. v. Wilson, 218 N.C. 556 , 11 S.E. 2d 567 , where verdict on the second count was received in similar manner. “The Court said: ‘We are of opinion that no irregularity or defect of procedure attended the rendering of the verdict on the second issue, and that a judgment based thereupon is valid. The jury attempted to return a verdict upon this issue, it is true, but it was not responsive to the indictment, and since it was a verdict they coul”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Davis v. State
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.