Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 300 N.C. 105 - State v. Daniels

State v. Daniels’s Empirical Analysis

1980

Citation profile

29
cited by 29 later decisions
1
states following
December 2013
most recently cited

29 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently December 2013 · most notably State v. Wilson (1985), State v. Jones (1981)

29 state decisions

2001980199020002010decided

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 Wilkins v. American Export Isbrandtsen Lines, Inc. · State v. Stephens · State v. Johnson · State v. Bell · State v. Sweezy

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

  1. “[w]here the jury renders a verdict of guilty on each count of a bill of indictment, an error in the trial or in the charge of the court as to one count is cured by the verdict on the other count where the offenses which are charged are of the same grade and punishable alike, only one sentence is imposed, and the error relating to one count does not affect the verdict on the other.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “To warrant a conviction on circumstantial evidence, the facts and circumstances must be sufficient to constitute substantial evidence of every essential element of the crime charged. Guilt must be a legitimate inference from facts established by the evidence. When the facts and circumstances warranted by the evidence do no more than raise a suspicion of guilt, they are insufficient to make out a case and a motion to dismiss should be allowed.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. ““Because of the verdicts rendered by the jury, the armed robbery charge became the dominant charge. For the purpose of sentencing, the court consolidated the charges and imposed a sentence of life imprisonment. It is self-evident that the single sentence imposed was within the parameters of the punishment authorized for the crime of armed robbery.””
    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.