State v. Mitchell’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
43 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 43 later decisions — most recently February 2019 · most notably State v. Jaynes (1995), State v. Goss (2007)
43 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 Doyle v. Ohio · Jenkins v. Anderson · United States v. Hale · State v. Odom · Anderson v. Charles
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 43 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the appellate court must be convinced that absent the error the jury probably would have reached a different verdict. In other words, the appellate court must determine that the error in question “tilted the scales” and caused the jury to reach its verdict convicting the defendant. Therefore, the test for “plain error” places a much heavier burden upon the defendant than that imposed by N.C.G.S. § 15A-1443 upon defendants who have preserved their rights by timely objection. This is so in part at least because the defendant could have prevented any error by making a timely objection.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“Rule 611. Mode and Order of Interrogation and Presentation (a) Control by the Court. The court shall exercise reasonable control over the mode and order of interrogating witnesses and presenting evidence so as to (1) make the interrogation and presentation effective for the ascertainment of the truth. . . . (c) Leading Questions. Leading questions should not be used on the direct examination of a witness except as may be necessary to develop his testimony. Ordinarily leading questions should be permitted on cross-examination.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Hosey“Here, the defendant did not exercise his right to remain silent after receiving Miranda warnings. He voluntarily engaged in conversation with [the police officer] and said that after he had taken the victim’s car it had been stolen from him. The prosecutor did not attempt to capitalize on the defendant’s reliance on the implicit assurances of the Miranda warnings, the concern embodied in the Doyle decision.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Westbrooks
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.