State v. Oliver’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

253 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 257 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “When challenges for cause are supported by prospective jurors' answers to questions propounded by the prosecutor and by the court, the court does not abuse its discretion, at least in the absence of a showing that further questioning by defendant would likely have produced different answers, by refusing to allow the defendant to question the juror challenged.”

   13 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Brown · State v. Brogden

2. “). In Oliver I, the defendants, who were convicted on the felony murder theory with armed robbery as the underlying felony, contended that the trial court erred in submitting pecuniary gain as an aggravating circumstance. This Court stated that the pecuniary gain circumstance examines the motive of the defendant. "While his motive does not constitute an element of the offense, it is appropriate for it to be considered on the question of his sentence.”

   5 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Taylor · State v. Quesinberry

3. “because the witness would likely assume that the police had brought [him] to view persons whom they suspected might be the guilty parties.”

   4 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Flowers · 166 N.C. App. 761 - State v. Maynard