State v. Brown’s Empirical Analysis
1984
Citation profile
98 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 98 later decisions — most recently March 2018 · most notably State v. Lucas (2001), State v. Williams (1985)
98 state decisions
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 State v. Odom · United States v. McCaskill · State v. Jerrett · State v. Sneeden · State v. Wright
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 98 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[A]n indictment charging first-degree kidnapping must include information ‘regarding the factual basis under which the State intends to proceed and, under the authority of [State v. Taylor, 301 N.C. 164 , 270 S.E. 2d 409 (1980)] and cases cited therein the State is limited to that factual basis at trial.’ State v. Moore, 311 N.C. 442, 463 , 319 S.E. 2d 150, 158 (1984) (Meyer, J., concurring). See also State v. Jerrett, 309 N.C. 239 , 307 S.E. 2d 339 (1983) (indictment for kidnapping will not support conviction unless all elements of crime accurately and clearly alleged in indictment).”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“In conclusion, the judge's instructions permitted the jury in this case to predicate guilt on theories of the crime which were not charged in the bill of indictment and which were, in one instance, not supported by the evidence at trial. We therefore hold that under the factual circumstances of this case, there was "plain error" in the jury instructions as that concept was defined in Odom and defendant must therefore receive a new trial on the first-degree kidnapping charge.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. State v. Lucas · State v. Tucker“Evidence of the slightest penetration of the female sex organ by the male sex organ is sufficient for vaginal intercourse and the emission of semen need not be shown.”
3 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.