State v. Williamson’s Empirical Analysis
1992
Citation profile
64 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 64 later decisions — most recently October 2016 · most notably State v. Barnes (1993), State v. Lloyd (2001)
64 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 Koufman v. Koufman · State v. Vause · State v. Benson · Avriett v. Avriett · State v. Small
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 64 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he scope of appellate review is limited to those issues presented by assignment of error set out in the record on appeal[; and where] no assignment of error corresponds to the issue presented, this matter is not properly presented for our consideration.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“"[If] evidence is admitted for a purpose other than the truth of the matter asserted," such as when evidence is admitted solely for purposes of corroboration, then "the protection afforded by the Confrontation Clause against testimonial statements is not at issue." ... According to our Supreme Court, North Carolina case law establishes "the rule that prior consistent statements are admissible even though they contain new or additional information so long as the narration of events is substantially similar to the witness' in-court testimony."”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Whether a motion for mistrial should be granted is a matter which rests in the sound discretion of the trial judge . . .,' and a mistrial is appropriate only when there are such serious improprieties as would make it impossible to attain a fair and impartial verdict under the law.”
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.