Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 318 N.C. 457 - State v. Ramey

State v. Ramey’s Empirical Analysis

1986

Citation profile

198
cited by 198 later decisions
2
states following
October 2020
most recently cited

198 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 198 later decisions — most recently October 2020 · most notably State v. Coffey (1990), State v. Lloyd (2001)

198 state decisions

89019861990200020102020decided

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 · Sullivan v. United States · Morgan Walton Properties, Inc. v. International City Bank & Trust Co. · United States v. McCaskill · State v. Walker

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

  1. “[i]n order to be corroborative and therefore properly admissible, the prior statement of the witness need not merely relate to specific facts brought out in the witness’s testimony at trial, so long as the prior statement in fact tends to add weight or credibility to such testimony.”
    14 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “A defendant is prejudiced by errors relating to rights arising other than under the Constitution of the United States when there is a reasonable possibility that, had the error in question not been committed, a different result would have been reached at the trial out of which the appeal arises.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “[i]n fulfilling the duties of a trial judge to supervise and control the course of a trial so as to insure justice to all parties, the judge may question a witness in order to clarify confusing or contradictory testimony.”
    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.