Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 272 N.C. 535 - State v. Dawson

State v. Dawson’s Empirical Analysis

1968

Citation profile

43
cited by 43 later decisions
6
states following
November 2017
most recently cited

43 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 43 later decisions — most recently November 2017 · most notably BURTON v. Sills (1968), Commonwealth v. Davis (1976)

43 state decisions

110196819701980199020002010decided

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 Palko v. State of Connecticut · State v. Stephens · Nunn v. State · State v. Reid · State v. Bogan

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 43 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; and, as standing armies in time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they shall not be maintained, and the military shall be kept under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power. Nothing herein shall justify the practice of carrying con cealed weapons or prevent the General Assembly from enacting penal statutes against that practice.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “consistently pointed out that the right of individuals to bear arms is not absolute, but is subject to regulation.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “It is true, however, that the North Carolina Constitution has been interpreted to guarantee a broader right to individuals to keep and bear arms. North Carolina decisions have interpreted our Constitution as guaranteeing the right to bear arms to the people in a collective sense—similar to the concept of a militia—and also to individuals. Yet, as the Supreme Court of this state also noted, [t]hese decisions have consistently pointed out that the right of individuals to bear arms is not absolute, but is subject to regulation. The regulation must be reasonable and not prohibitive, and must bear a fair relation to the preservation of the public peace and safety.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.