Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 298 N.C. 355 - State v. Johnson

State v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis

1979

Citation profile

422
cited by 422 later decisions
6
states following
August 2019
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 417 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 422 later decisions — most recently August 2019 · most notably State v. Benson (1988), State v. Coffey (1990)

3 federal appellate · 417 state decisions

153019791980199020002010decided

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 Chapman v. State of California · Witherspoon v. Illinois · Mullaney v. Wilbur · Public Broadcasting Service v. Network Project · Pope v. Nebraska

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

  1. “[T]he impropriety of the argument must be gross indeed in order for this Court to hold that a trial judge abused his discretion in not recognizing and correcting ex mero motu an argument which defense counsel apparently did not believe was prejudicial when he heard it.”
    34 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “As in the case of providing private investigators or other expert assistance to indigent defendants, we think the appointment of additional counsel is a matter within the discretion of the trial judge and required only upon a showing by a defendant that there is a reasonable likelihood that it will materially assist the defendant in the preparation of his defense or that without such help it is probable that defendant will not receive a fair trial.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “[T]he trial judge has broad discretion to see that a competent, fair and impartial jury is impaneled and rulings of the trial judge in this regard will not be reversed absent a showing of abuse of discretion.”
    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.