Carr v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1997
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 74 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 78 later decisions — most recently August 2020 · most notably DeYoung v. State (1997), Mize v. State (1998)
2 federal appellate · 74 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Jackson v. Denno · Rhode Island v. Innis · Wainwright v. Witt
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 78 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“OCGA § 5-6-41 (f) establishes a procedure whereby a party who contends that the transcript or record does not truly or fully disclose what transpired at trial may have the record completed either by stipulation of the parties as to what occurred or the independent recollection of the trial judge. If anything material to either party is omitted from the record, the omission may be corrected and, if necessary, a supplemental record filed.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“Evidence never actually admitted at trial cannot properly become part of the record on appeal pursuant to OCGA § 5-6-41 (f). That section is solely for the purpose of making the record speak the truth, not for adding evidence to the record or supplying fatal deficiencies after the fact.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“1. The jury was authorized to find that Carr, his girl friend Melissa Burge-son, and the 17-year-old victim [Young] attended a party on' the evening of the crimes, where they all consumed alcohol and used drugs. Carr and Burgeson discussed robbing the victim at the party. In the early hours of the following day, Burgeson took the victim’s car keys and talked him into letting her drive him home. Burgeson drove the victim, Carr, and two juveniles to a remote area of south Monroe County in the victim’s car. During the ride, Carr showed one of the juveniles a large knife and whispered that he intended to kill the victim. Burgeson stopped the car on a dirt road, and when the victim opened the trunk to look for more drugs, Burgeson motioned to Carr to kill him. Carr grabbed the victim’s hair, pulled his head back and slashed his throat. At Burgeson’s urging, Carr stabbed the victim repeatedly and then beat him in the head with a baseball bat. After Burgeson took the victim’s money, Carr and one of the juveniles dragged the victim’s body to the roadside, leaving him to die from his injuries. Carr and Burgeson fled to Tennessee in the^ victim’s car and were arrested following a high speed chase. After receiving medical treatment at a local hospital;-they were placed in the back of a . police car in which police had activated a hidden tape recorder. ■ Their recorded conversation, in which Carr admitted ^■killing the victim, was introduced into evidence at Carr’s trial. The jury was al”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Carr v. Schofield
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.