State v. Tilley’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

102 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 102 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “(1) a conspiracy existed; (2) the acts or declarations were made by a party to it and in pursuance of its objectives; and (3) while it was active, that is, after it was formed and before it ended.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 54 N.C. App. 1 - State v. Mettrick · 56 N.C. App. 374 - State v. Russell

2. “If the charge as a whole presents the law fairly and clearly to the jury, the fact that isolated expressions, standing alone, might be considered erroneous will afford no ground for a reversal.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 166 N.C. App. 517 - State v. Cox · State v. Terry

3. “On the facts of the present case it is appropriate to examine the rules which apply to acts or declarations of a conspirator committed or said outside the pendency of the conspiracy. It does not necessarily follow that these acts or declarations are always inadmissible. Acts done by a co-conspirator before or after the conspiracy, which were not intended as declarations, are not hearsay and thus are competent evidence, assuming their relevance. Anderson v. United States, 417 U.S. 211 , 41 L.Ed. 2d 20 , 94 S.Ct. 2253 (1974); Lutwak v. United States, 344 U.S. 604 , 97 L.Ed. 593 , 73 S.Ct. 481 (1953). Any statements in our cases that may have indicated that acts by co-conspirators outside the pendency of a conspiracy are inadmissible, are not applicable to acts not intended as a means of expression. * * * * Smith’s act in carrying a pistol was not intended as a declaration. Hence it matters not whether the prosecution had established a prima facie case for the existence of the conspiracy at all times that Smith was seen with the gun. This evidence was within the personal knowledge of the testifying witnesses and was not hearsay. Defendants’ exceptions 14-18 are overruled. Similarly, Julia Pruitt’s testimony that she later threw this gun away in the pasture behind her trailer was admissi ble. Of her own knowledge, she explained how she gained possession of Smith’s pistol, disposed of it and later led law enforcement officers to it. State v. Bovender, 233 N.C. 683 , 65 S.E. 2d 323”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Martin