Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 304 N.C. 149 - State v. Searles

State v. Searles’s Empirical Analysis

1981

Citation profile

107
cited by 107 later decisions
2
states following
July 2017
most recently cited

107 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 107 later decisions — most recently July 2017 · most notably State v. Morgan (2004), State v. Jones (1994)

107 state decisions

3501981199020002010decided

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 Avery v. State of Alabama · Keeble v. United States · Cappaert v. United States · Beal v. Franklin · State v. Covington

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

  1. “It is, of course, axiomatic that a motion for a continuance is ordinarily addressed to the sound discretion of the trial judge whose ruling thereon is not subject to review absent a gross abuse. It is equally well established, however, that, when such a motion raises a constitutional issue, the trial court's action upon it involves a question of law which is fully reviewable by an examination of the particular circumstances of each case. Denial of a motion for a continuance, regardless of its nature, is, nevertheless, grounds for a new trial only upon a showing by defendant that the denial was erroneous and that [his] case was prejudiced thereby.”
    9 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[A] motion for a continuance should be supported by an affidavit showing sufficient grounds for the continuance.”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “[T]he constitutional guarantees of assistance of counsel and confrontation of witnesses include the right of a defendant to have a reasonable time to investigate and prepare his case, but no precise limits are fixed in this context, and what constitutes a reasonable length of time for defense preparation must be determined upon the facts of each case.”
    6 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.