247 N.C. App. 784 - State v. Crook’s Empirical Analysis
2016
Citation profile
4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
April 2019
most recently cited
4 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Rhode Island v. Innis · Oregon v. Elstad · Stansbury v. California · Dickerson v. United States
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.
“[a]t most ... constituted a possible calculation of [the d]efendant's prior record level and did not provide affirmative notice that the State intended to prove the existence of the prior record point authorized by N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1340.14(b)(7) as required by N.C. Gen. Stat. § 15A-1340.16(a6).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent“[i]t is not necessary that an objection be lodged at the sentencing hearing in order for a claim that the record evidence does not support the trial court's determination of a defendant's prior record level to be preserved for appellate review.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent“did not determine that the State had provided notice of its intent to prove defendant committed the crimes charged while on probation, parole, or post-release supervision”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. State v. Bennett
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.