State v. Nugent’s Empirical Analysis
1955
Citation profile
69 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 69 later decisions — most recently June 2004 · most notably State v. Garcia (2004), State v. Kirby (1970)
69 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 The People v. Green · State v. . Thomas · State v. . Morgan · State v. Gibbs · State v. Thorne
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 69 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Art. I, Sec. 11, of the North Carolina Constitution, guarantees to every person charged with crime the right to be informed of the accusation against him. This constitutional guarantee is a substantial redeclaration of the common law rule requiring the charge against the defendant to be set out in the warrant or indictment with such exactness that the defendant can have a fair and reasonable opportunity to prepare his defense, can avail himself of his conviction or acquittal as a bar to subsequent prosecution for the same offense, and can enable the court, on conviction, to pronounce sentence according to law. S. v. Jenkins, 238 N.C. 396 , 77 S.E. 2d 796 ; S. v. Green, 151 N.C. 729 , 66 S.E. 564 ; S. v. Lunsford, 150 N.C. 862 , 64 S.E. 765 ; 42 C.J.S., Indictments and Informations, Sec. 90. This right of the accused is a substantital right that may not be ignored, and not a mere technical or formal right. People v. Green, 368 Ill. 242 , 13 N.E. (2d) 278, 115 A.L.R. 348 .””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Ingram““As to the sufficiency of description of property in an indictment for larceny, this is stated in a note to Jones v. State, 64 Fla. 92 , 59 So. 892 , L.R.A. 1915 B 71, in the L.R.A. volume: 'To apply the rules deducible from the cases it seems that property alleged to have been taken should be described by the name usually applied to it when in the condition it was in when taken, and where possible to state the number or quantity, kind, quality, distinguishing features, etc., thereof.’ ””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Council
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.