State v. Vandiford’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““S. v. Currie, supra [ 206 N.C. 598 , 174 S.E. 447 ], presented a similar factual situation. In respect thereto this Court held that the statement was not sufficient, — that it was the duty of the defendants to see that the indictment appeared in the record, or, if lost, to apply to the Superior Court for an order that a copy be supplied, citing S. v. McDraughon, 168 N.C. 131 , 83 S.E. 181 , and the appeal was dismissed. To like effect is S. v. Gosnell, 208 N.C. 401, 181 S.E. 323 ; S. v. Dry, 224 N.C. 234 , 29 S.E. 2d 698 ; S. v. Jenkins, 234 N.C. 112 , 66 S.E. 2d 819 ; S. v. Dobbs, 234 N.C. 560 , 67 S.E. 2d 751 . “In accordance with ruling in S. v. Currie, supra, defendant has now applied to Superior Court of Craven County for an order that a copy of the bill of indictment be supplied, and such an order has been made, and certified to this Court, with copy of a true bill of indictment as returned by grand jury, and on which defendant was tried. Under these circumstances, the appeal will not be dismissed, but, rather, the order and copy of bill of indictment so certified will be attached to and become a part of the record on the appeal.””

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