247 N.C. App. 766 - State v. Brice’s Empirical Analysis
2016
Citation profile
4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
February 2018
most recently cited
4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Litwak v. Oscar Productions, Inc. · Andreas v. United States · State v. Wallace · State v. Felmet · State v. Petersilie
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“was fully aware of the charges against him ..., understood his rights and the effect of the stipulation, and ... was in no way prejudiced by the failure of the court to formally arraign him and advise him of his rights.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Brice“an indictment for habitual misdemeanor larceny is subject to the provisions of N.C.[G.S.] § 15A-928”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Brice“a formal arraignment under [N.C.G.S. §] 15A-928(c) is not a matter of jurisdictional consequence,”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Brice
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.