State v. Woodson’s Empirical Analysis
1975
Citation profile
27 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 29 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently February 2004 · most notably Woodson v. North Carolina (1976), State v. Hutchins (1981)
27 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 Brady v. United States · Furman v. Georgia · Olmstead v. United States · Oyler v. Boles · Lisenba v. People of State of California
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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“To say that the United States Attorney must literally plead every offense and every offender alike is to delegate him an impossible task; of course, this concept would negate discretion. Myriad factors can enter into the prosecutor's decision. Two persons may have committed what is precisely the same legal offense but the prosecutor is not compelled by law, duty or tradition to treat them the same as to the charges. On the contrary, he is expected to exercise discretion and common sense to the end that if, for example, one is a young first offender and the other older, with a criminal record, or one played a lesser and the other a dominant role, one the instigator and the other the follower, the prosecutor can and should take such factors into account; no court has any jurisdiction to inquire into or review his decision ( Woodson, supra, at 618 ).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“s 14-17. Murder in the first and second degree defined; punishment. A murder which shall be perpetrated by means of poison, lying in wait, imprisonment, starving, torture, or by any other kind of willful, deliberate and premeditated killing, or which shall be committed in the perpetration or attempt to perpetrate any arson, rape, robbery, burglary or other felony, shall be deemed to be murder in the first degree and shall be punished with death: Provided, if at the time of rendering its verdict in open court, the jury shall so recommend, the punishment shall be imprisonment for life in the State's prison, and the court shall so instruct the jury. All other kinds of murder shall be deemed murder in the second degree, and shall be punished with imprisonment of not less than two nor more than thirty years in the State's prison.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“G.S. 14-17, as rewritten on 8 April 1974 by the enactment of N. C. Sess. Laws, ch. 1201, § 1 provides that mur der in the first degree “shall be punished with death.” Defendants contend, however, that capital punishment “under the laws of North Carolina [would] violate U. S. Const, amend. VIII and amend. XIV, § 1, and N. C. Const, art. 1, §§ 19, 27.” In the last three years this Court has several times rejected these contentions. They have been thoroughly considered and further discussion would be merely repetitious. See State v. Waddell, 282 N.C. 431 , 194 S.E. 2d 19 (1973); State v. Jarrette, 284 N.C. 625 , 202 S.E. 2d 721 (1974); State v. Fowler, 285 N.C. 90 , 203 S.E. 2d 803 (1974); State v. Crowder, 285 N.C. 42 , 203 S.E. 2d 38 (1974); State v. Avery, 286 N.C. 459 , 212 S.E. 2d 142 (1975).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Bush
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.