252 N.C. App. 46 - State v. Hyman’s Empirical Analysis
2017
Citation profile
2 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Cuyler v. Sullivan · McMann v. Richardson · Wiggins v. Smith, Warden · Wood v. Georgia
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.
“when a witness is confronted with prior statements that are inconsistent with the witness' testimony, the witness' answers are final as to collateral matters, but where the inconsistencies are material to the issue at hand in the trial, the witness' testimony may be contradicted by other testimony”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Hyman“Ms. Smallwood wrote the notes admitted as Defendant's MAR Exhibit 1 contemporaneously with any conversation she had with Speller; that the purported conversation took place on the date appearing on the exhibit, i.e., November 20, 2001; or that the conversation ever took place.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Hyman“[t]he purpose of our Holloway and Sullivan exceptions from the ordinary requirements of Strickland ... is ... to apply needed prophylaxis in situations where Strickland itself is evidently inadequate to assure vindication of the defendant's Sixth Amendment right to counsel”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Hyman
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.