Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 318 N.C. 54 - State v. Lowery

State v. Lowery’s Empirical Analysis

1986

Citation profile

72
cited by 72 later decisions
1
states following
October 2018
most recently cited

72 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 72 later decisions — most recently October 2018 · most notably State v. Golphin (2000), State v. Kemmerlin (2002)

72 state decisions

2801986199020002010decided

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 Strickland v. Washington · Brady v. State of Maryland · Giglio v. United States · McMann v. Richardson · Mooney v. Holohan

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

  1. “do not consider it to be the function of an appellate court to second-guess [trial] counsel's tactical decisions[.]”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “First, the defendant must show that counsel's performance was deficient. This requires showing that counsel made errors so serious that counsel was not functioning as the "counsel" guaranteed the defendant by the Sixth Amendment. Second, the defendant must show that the deficient performance prejudiced the defense. This requires showing that counsel's errors were so serious as to deprive the defendant of a fair trial, a trial whose result is reliable.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. ““The question for the court in ruling upon defendant’s motion for dismissal is whether there is substantial evidence (1) of each essential element of the offense charged, or of a lesser offense included therein, and (2) of defendant’s being the perpetrator of such offense. If substantial evidence of both of the above has been presented at trial, the motion is properly denied. ... In considering a motion to dismiss, the evidence must be considered in the light most favorable to the State and the State is entitled to every reasonable intendment and every reasonable inference to be drawn therefrom. . . . Contradictions and discrepancies in the evidence are strictly for the jury to decide.””
    1 later decision 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.