State v. Young’s Empirical Analysis
1977
Citation profile
72 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 72 later decisions — most recently April 2019 · most notably State v. Lee (1994), State v. Smith (1987)
72 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 Pate v. Robinson · Drope v. Missouri · Woodson v. North Carolina · Fahy v. Connecticut · Schneble v. Florida
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 72 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[A] conviction cannot stand where defendant lacks capacity to defend himself. Drope v. Missouri, 420 U.S. 162 , 43 L.Ed. 2d 103 , 95 S.Ct. 896 (1975); Pate v. Robinson, 383 U.S. 375 , 15 L.Ed. 2d 815 , 86 S.Ct. 836 (1966). ‘[A] trial court has a constitutional duty to institute, sua sponte, a competency hearing if there is substantial evidence before the court indicating that the accused may be mentally incompetent.’ (Emphasis added.) Crenshaw v. Wolff, 504 F. 2d 377 (8th Cir. 1974), cert. denied, 420 U.S. 966 (1975). See Wolf v. United States, 430 F. 2d 443 (10th Cir. 1970) (‘bona fide doubt’ as to competency).”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage““in order for an appellant to assert a constitutional or statutory right in the appellate courts, the right must have been asserted and the issue raised before the trial court. Further, it must affirmatively appear on the record that the issue was passed upon by the trial court.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““It is settled law in this State that a witness may use a photograph to illustrate his testimony and make it more intelligible to the court and jury; and if a photograph accurately depicts that which it purports to show and is relevant and material, the fact that it is gory or gruesome, or otherwise may tend to arouse prejudice, does not render it inadmissible.” 1 Stansbury’s North Carolina Evidence (Brandis rev. 1973) § 34; State v. Frazier, 280 N.C. 181 , 185 S.E. 2d 652 (1972); State v. Doss, 279 N.C. 413 , 183 S.E. 2d 671 (1971); State v. Atkinson, 278 N.C. 168 , 179 S.E. 2d 410 (1971); State v. Barrow, 276 N.C. 381 , 172 S.E. 2d 512 (1970).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Cooke
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.