State v. Freeman’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

40 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 40 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““The general rule is that ‘[e]vidence of other offenses is inadmissible on the issue of guilt if its only relevance is to show the character of the accused or his disposition to commit an offense of the nature of the one charged; but if it tends to prove any other relevant act it will not be excluded merely because, it also shows him to have been guilty of an independent crime.’ ” 1 Stansbury’s North Carolina Evidence, § 91, pp. 289-290 (Brandis rev. 1973); State v. Keller, 297 N.C. 674, 679 , 256 S.E. 2d 710, 714 (1979). If consequently, the evidence tends to identify the accused as the perpetrator of the crime charged it is admissible notwithstanding that it also shows defendant to be guilty of another criminal offense. “Where the accused is not definitely identified as the perpetrator of the crime charged and the circumstances tend to show that the crime charged and another offense were committed by the same persons, evidence that the accused committed the other offense is admissible to identify him as the perpetrator of the crime charged.” State v. McClain, 240 N.C. 171, 175 , 81 S.E. 2d 364, 367 (1954); accord, State v. Perry, 275 N.C. 565, 571 , 169 S.E. 2d 839, 843 (1969).”

   5 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Thomas · State v. Moore

2. “We think the testimony of Ms. Walters was probative of this question. It did tend to identify defendant as the perpetrator of the crimes against Ms. Whitman. This is so because the circumstances of the crimes charged and those of the offenses observed by Ms. Walters tend to show that both were committed by the same person. The victim, Ms. Whitman, testified that when she first observed her assailant he was standing naked in her bathroom. After he raped her he masturbated in her presence. Ms. Walters testified that she had on numerous occasions observed defendant on her premises in her presence standing naked and that on some of these occasions defendant would masturbate.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Moore