State v. Bindyke’s Empirical Analysis
1975
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 181 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 185 later decisions — most recently February 2021 · most notably State v. Rogers (1986), State v. Ashe (1985)
2 federal appellate · 181 state decisions — followed in 15 states
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 Alfred Dunhill of London, Inc. v. Republic of Cuba · Blasius v. United States · Ratcliff v. Bruce · State v. Cutler · State v. Goldberg
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 185 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A criminal conspiracy is an agreement between two or more persons to do an unlawful act or to do a lawful act in an unlawful way or by unlawful means.”
17 later decisions quote this exact passage““The rule formulated by the overwhelming majority of the decided cases is that the presence of an alternate, either during the entire period of deliberation preceding the verdict, or his presence at any time during the deliberations of the twelve regular jurors, is a fundamental irregularity of constitutional proportions which requires a mistrial or vitiates the verdict, if rendered. And this is the result notwithstanding the defendant’s counsel consented, or failed to object, to the presence of the alternate.[ 10 ] See United States v. Beasley, 464 F.2d 468 (10th Cir.1972); United States v. Virginia Erection Corporation, 335 F.2d 868 (4th Cir.1964); People v. Britton, 4 Cal.2d 622 , 52 P.2d 217 (1935); People v. Adame, 36 Cal.App.3d 402 , 111 Cal.Rptr. 462 (1973); People v. Bruneman, 4 Cal.App.2d 75 , 40 P.2d 891 (1935); Berry v. State, 298 So.2d 491 (Fla.App. 4th Dist.1974); Glenn v. State, 217 Ga. 553 , 123 S.E.2d 896 (1962); State Highway Comm. v. Dunks, Mont., 166 Mont. 239 , 531 P.2d 1316 (1975); People v. King, 13 A.D.2d 264 , 216 N.Y.S.2d 638 (1961); Brigman v. State, 350 P.2d 321 (Okl.Cr.App.1960); Commonwealth v. Krick, 164 Pa.Super. 516 , 67 A.2d 746 (1949); State v. Cuzick, 85 Wash.2d 146 , 530 P.2d 288 (1975); Annot., Alternate or Additional Jurors, 84 A.L.R.2d 1288 , 1312-14 (1962); 50 C.J.S. Juries § 123 c and d (1947).””
5 later decisions quote this exact passage“[T]he presence of an alternate in the jury room during the jury's deliberations violates N.C. Const. art. I, § 24 and G.S. 9-18 and constitutes reversible error per se .”
4 later decisions 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.