State v. Atkinson’s Empirical Analysis
1979
Citation profile
73 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 73 later decisions — most recently April 2007 · most notably State v. Young (1985), State v. Stokes (1987)
73 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 Gregg v. Georgia · Keeble v. United States · Beal v. Franklin · State v. Barfield · State v. Benton
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 73 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The consequences of an assault which is the direct cause of the death of another are not excused nor is the criminal responsibility for the death lessened by a preexisting physical condition which made the victim unable to withstand the shock of the assault and without which preexisting condition the blow would not have been fatal.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“In the nature of things, evidence of shoeprints has no legitimate or logical tendency to identify an accused as the perpetrator of a crime unless the attendant circumstances support this triple inference: (1) That the shoe-prints were found at or near the place of the crime; (2) that the shoeprints were made at the time of the crime; and (3) that the shoeprints correspond to shoes worn by the accused at the time of the crime. Similar criteria apply to evidence of automobile tracks offered to identify the owner of a motor vehicle as the perpetrator of an offense. Moreover, the bare opinon of a witness that a particular shoeprint is the track of a specified person is without probative force on the question of identification.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Jackson“[I]f the only effect of the evidence is to excite prejudice or sympathy, its admission may be grounds for a new trial. State v. Lynch, 279 N.C. 1 , 181 S.E. 2d 561 (1971); State v. Johnson, 270 N.C. 215 , 154 S.E. 2d 48 (1967). Ordinarily, however, the reception of irrelevant evidence is considered harmless error. See generally 1 Stansbury’s North Carolina Evidence § 9 (Brandis Rev. 1973). The burden is on the party who asserts that evidence was improperly admitted to show not only error but also to show that he was prejudiced by its admission. State v. Agnew, 294 N.C. 382 , 241 S.E. 2d 684 (1978); State v. Cross, 284 N.C. 174 , 200 S.E. 2d 27 (1973).”
1 later decision 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.