State v. Deck’s Empirical Analysis
1974
Citation profile
89 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 95 later decisions — most recently February 2019 · most notably State v. Porter (1981), State v. Vinson (1975)
89 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 State v. Faust · State v. Mercer · State v. Robbins · State v. Jennings · State v. . Litteral
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 95 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(1) it appeared to defendant and he believed it to be necessary to kill the deceased in order to save himself from death or great bodily harm; and (2) defendant’s belief was reasonable in that the circumstances as they appeared to him at the time were sufficient to create such a belief in the mind of a person of ordinary firmness; and (3) defendant was not the aggressor in bringing on the affray, i.e., he did not aggressively and willingly enter into the fight without legal excuse or provocation; and (4) defendant did not use excessive force, i.e., did not use more force than was necessary or reasonably appeared to him to be necessary under the circumstances to protect himself from death or great bodily harm.”
6 later decisions quote this exact passage“[w]hen supported by competent evidence, self-defense unquestionably becomes a substantial and essential feature of a criminal case[.]”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““We think the challenged statements were made in immediate response to the stimulus of the occurrence and without opportunity to reflect or fabricate. Further, decedent had no motive for fabrication. The time lapse between the completion of the alleged crime, the ensuing chase and the statements made to the witness was negligible. In our opinion, the challenged statements were spontaneous utterances and were therefore correctly admitted by the trial judge.” 285 N.C. at 214 , 203 S.E. 2d at 834 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Brogden
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.