State v. Foster’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 federal appellate · 91 state decisions

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

1. ““When a defendant elects to testify in his own behalf, he surrenders his privilege against self-incrimination and knows he will be subject to impeachment by questions relating to specific acts of criminal and degrading conduct. Such ‘cross-examination for the purpose of impeachment is not limited to conviction of crimes. Any act of the witness which tends to impeach his character may be inquired about or proven by cross-examination.’ ” (Emphasis added.) (Citations omitted.)”

   5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. 54 N.C. App. 386 - State v. Ashley · State v. Roberts

2. “I “Q. Now, I will ask you if on October 20, of 19, excuse me, on August 3, of 1971 if you didn’t break into Martha W. Pitts’ house . “Mr. Hicks: Objection. “Q. At 2416 Rozzelles Ferry Road here in the city? “Mr. Hicks: Objection.” “This is the subject of Exception No. 23.” II “Q. I will ask you if you didn’t break in the residence of James Sinclair at 312 Center Street on October 11, 1971, by going into the front door and reaching up and unscrewing with your fingers a light bulb in the ceiling? “Mr. Hicks: Objection. “Court: Overruled. “Q. Did you or did you not? “A. What you mean ‘did I’? No, I didn’t.” “This is the subject of Exception No. 24.” III “Q. I will ask you if you didn’t break into the residence of Lonnie Bell Wallace at 217 South Turner Street? How far is South Turner Street from there on Center Street? “Mr. Hicks: Objection. “A. I couldn’t tell you. “Q. I will ask you if you didn’t break into Lonnie Bell Wallace’s house on February 20, 1971, between 6:30 and 11:00 o’clock and by breaking out the center glass window in the front door? “Mr. Hicks: Objection. “Court: Overruled. “A. Sure didn’t.” “This is the subject of Exception No. 25.” IV “Q. I will ask you if you did not break into the residence of Teretha Phillips at 2224 Roslyn Avenue on the 23rd of May, 1971, by prying open her kitchen window and breaking out the window pane? “Mr. Hicks: Objection. “Court: Overruled. “A. Sure didn’t.” “This is the subject of Exception No. 26.” V “Q. I will ask you if on the 1”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. 423 F. Supp. 53 - Foster v. Watkins

3. ““The order of proof is a rule of practice resting in the sound discretion of the trial court. State v. Thomas, 244 N.C. 212 , 93 S.E. 2d 63 (1956). ‘The court, to attain the ends of justice, may in its discretion allow the examination of witnesses at any stage of the trial.’ State v. King, 84 N.C. 737 (1881). The great weight of authority holds that ‘the admission in a criminal prosecution of evidence as a part of the rebuttal, when such evidence would have been properly admissible in chief, rests in the sound discretion of the trial judge and will not be interfered with in the absence of gross abuse of that discretion.’ 53 Am. Jur., Trial, § 129. Accord, State v. Mack, 282 N.C. 334 , 193 S.E. 2d 71 (1972); State v. Knight, 282 N.C. 220 , 192 S.E. 2d 283 (1972).””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. State v. Britt