State v. Elam’s Empirical Analysis
1965
Citation profile
17
cited by 17 later decisions
2
states following
June 1975
most recently cited
2 federal appellate · 15 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Johnson v. Zerbst · Escobedo v. Illinois · Massiah v. United States · Hamilton v. Alabama · Crooker v. State of California
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 17 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Defendant’s contention that Elam’s extrajudicial confessions were admitted without a proper preliminary inquiry is overruled. When sergeant Bunn was asked by the prosecuting officer for the State what conversation he had with Elam, Elam’s lawyer objected and the trial judge sent the jury to their room. Whereupon, Elam’s lawyer, Mr. Purser, cross-examined and recross-examined Bunn at length in respect to the circumstances surrounding the making of the extrajudicial confessions of guilt by Elam. After this was finished, there is nothing in the record to indicate that defendant desired to offer any evidence in rebuttal of Bunn’s testimony. Certainly, there is nothing to indicate that the trial judge refused to hear any evidence by defendant in rebuttal. ‘It was not the duty of the court to call upon the defendant to offer evidence.’ S. v. Smith, 213 N.C. 299 , 195 S.E. 819 . * * *””
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Keith · State v. Vickers
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.