31 N.C. App. 713 - State v. Lockamy’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

12 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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The defendant has been charged with robbery with a firearm, which is taking and carrying away the personal property of another from his person or his presence without his consent by endangering or threatening a person's life with a firearm, the taker knowing that he was not entitled to take the property and intending to deprive another of its use permanently. For you to find these defendants guilty of this offense, the State must prove seven things beyond a reasonable doubt. First, that these defendants took property from the person of another or in his presence. That these defendants carried away the property. Third, that the person did not voluntarily consent to the taking and carrying away of the property. Fourth, that these defendants knew they were not entitled to take the property. Fifth, that at the time of the taking these defendants intended to deprive that person of its use permanently. Sixth, that these defendants had a firearm in their possession at the time they obtained the property. And seventh, that these defendants obtained the property by endangering or threatening the life of that person with the firearm. If you find from the evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that on or about the alleged date these defendants had in their possession a firearm and took and carried away the property from the person or presence of the person without voluntary consent by endangering or threatening her life with the use or threatened use of a firearm, these defendants knowing t”

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

2. “found reversible error where two or more defendants are tried together for the same offense upon jury instructions susceptible to the construction that the jury should convict all of the defendants if they find beyond a reasonable doubt that any of the defendants committed the offense charged.”

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

3. “the trial judge must either give a separate final mandate as to each defendant or otherwise clearly instruct the jury that the guilt or innocence of one defendant is not dependent upon the guilt or innocence of a codefendant.”

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