Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 279 N.C. 163 - State v. Smith

State v. Smith’s Empirical Analysis

1971

Citation profile

73
cited by 73 later decisions
1
states following
March 2019
most recently cited

73 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 73 later decisions — most recently March 2019 · most notably State v. Brown (1987), State v. Jones (2002)

73 state decisions

20019711980199020002010decided

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 Berger v. United States · State v. Miller · Hall v. United States · State v. Dockery · State v. . Little

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

  1. “"I know when to ask for the death penalty and when not to. This isn't the first case; it's the ten thousandth for me.... I did ... have in this courtroom three weeks ago a man charged with a sexual assault... who was as innocent of it as I.... I hope my reputation in this community where you elected me to this office that I try not an innocent man.... When I found that out about that case ... no one was on his feet faster than I to come to his defense.... I wanted to tell you about that and get back to the facts of this case." In characterizing the defendant, the solicitor said that a man who would do what this woman says this defendant did is "lower than the bone belly of a cur dog." During the State's evidence, the investigating officer had quoted the defendant as saying that he worked for his employer, the bus company, on May 8, 1969. The solicitor said: "Liar! No, Mr. Smith, State's Exhibit # 2 says you were not working that day." Exhibit # 2 introduced in evidence by the State was the bus company's work record showing that on May 8, 1969, the defendant began work at 5:43 a.m., was off duty from 9:26 a.m. until 2:22 p.m. and was checked out at 5:14 p.m. In discussing the defendant's evidence of his good character the solicitor said: "I don't care who they bring in here ... to say to you that his character and reputation in the community in which he lives is good. I tell you it isn't worth a darn.... I don't believe a living word of what he says about this case, members of”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “"The United States Attorney is the representative not of an ordinary party to a controversy, but of a sovereignty whose obligation to govern impartially is as compelling as its obligation to govern at all; and whose interest, therefore, in a criminal prosecution is not that it shall win a case, but that justice shall be done. As such, he is in a peculiar and very definite sense the servant of the law, the twofold aim of which is that guilt shall not escape or innocence suffer. He may prosecute with earnestness and vigor—indeed, he should do so. But, while he may strike hard blows, he is not at liberty to strike foul ones. It is as much his duty to refrain from improper methods calculated to produce a wrongful conviction as it is to use every legitimate means to bring about a just one."”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “'When the prosecutor becomes abusive, injects his personal views and opinions into the argument before the jury, he violates the rules of fair debate.'”
    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.