State v. Thompson’s Empirical Analysis
1977
Citation profile
2 district · 30 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 32 later decisions — most recently March 2010 · most notably State v. Brown (1987), State v. Myers (1980)
2 district · 30 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. Monk · State v. Britt · State v. Miller · State v. Noell · State v. Gainey
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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The record does not reveal such prosecutorial misconduct nor such improprieties as those involved in State v. Britt, 288 N.C. 699 , 220 S.E. 2d 283 (1975), or State v. Smith, 279 N.C. 163 , 181 S.E. 2d 458 (1971). Nor does the record reveal an attempt to argue matters not legitimately arising on the evidence. Compare State v. Roach, 248 N.C. 63 , 102 S.E. 2d 413 (1958). Moreover, no violation of G.S. 8-57 or G.S. 8-54 appears, as in State v. Thompson, 290 N.C. 431 , 226 S.E. 2d 487 (1976), and State v. Monk, 286 N.C. 509 , 212 S.E. 2d 125 (1975). While the courtroom conduct of [this] District Attorney ... in many cases reflects a callous indifference to decisions of this Court, ... we find in this case no impropriety of sufficient moment to warrant a new trial.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Brown“repeatedly held that it is proper for the trial judge to charge the jury that it should carefully scrutinize the testimony of a criminal defendant because he is interested in the outcome of the case. It is likewise proper forattorneys to so argue.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“It is permissible for the prosecutor to draw the jury's attention to the failure of the defendant to produce exculpatory testimony from witnesses available to defendant.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Craig
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.