State v. Hemby’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
28 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently August 2011 · most notably 189 N.C. App. 1 - Lineberger v. North Carolina Department of Correction (2008), State v. Wagner (2002)
28 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. Jones · 67 N.C. App. 549 - State v. Mitchell · State v. Smith · 38 N.C. App. 108 - State v. Lewis · 65 N.C. App. 411 - State v. Watson
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“When a conviction or sentence imposed in superior court has been set aside on direct review or collateral attack, the court may not impose a new sentence for the same offense, or for a different offense based on the same conduct, which is more severe than the prior sentence less the portion of the prior sentence previously served.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Wagner · State v. Mara“[W]hen indictments or convictions with equal presumptive terms are consolidated for sentencing without the finding of aggravating or mitigating circumstances, and the terms are totaled to arrive at the sentence ... the sentence, for purposes of appellate review, . . . will be deemed to be equally attributable to each indictment or conviction.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“At resentencing, after the trial court arrested judgment on three of defendant’s indictments, only three indictments, A, B and D, remained for resentencing, A and B having initially been consolidated in group one, and D in group two. When the trial court again consolidated indictments A and B for sentencing in group one, no more than two years’ imprisonment could be imposed without exceeding the sentence originally imposed on these indictments. When the trial court imposed a new sentence of three years, the sentence was more severe than the original sentence on these indictments.”
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.