State v. Wright’s Empirical Analysis
1972
Citation profile
35 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently March 2010 · most notably State v. Taylor (1981), State v. Brower (1976)
35 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 Bruton v. United States · Furman v. Georgia · Roberts v. Russell · State v. Williams · State v. Fox
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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““. . . [I]n joint trials of defendants it is necessary to exclude extrajudicial confessions unless all portions which implicate defendants other than the declarant can be deleted without prejudice either to the State or the declarant. If such deletion is not possible, the State must choose between relinquishing the confession or trying the defendants separately. The foregoing pronouncement presupposes (1) that the confession is inadmissible as to the codefendant (see State v. Bryant, supra [ 250 N.C. 113 , 108 S.E. 2d 128 ]), and (2) that the declarant will not take the stand. If the declarant can be cross-examined, a codefendant has been accorded his right to confrontation. See State v. Kerley, supra [ 246 N.C. 157 , 97 S.E. 2d 876 ] at 160, 97 S.E. 2d at 879 .” (Emphasis added.)”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Heard
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.