Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 333 S.C. 124 - State v. Charping

State v. Charping’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

12
cited by 12 later decisions
1
states following
September 2014
most recently cited

12 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently September 2014

12 state decisions

80199820002010decided

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 Conway v. Statesman Mortgage Co. · Brooks v. Tennessee · Robinett v. United States · Ferguson v. Georgia · Young v. Harper

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

  1. “This Court has previously stated “it is always proper for an attorney in argument to the jury to point out the failure of a party to call a witness.” State v. Hammond, 270 S.C. 347, 356 , 242 S.E.2d 411, 415 (1978). See also State v. Bamberg, 270 S.C. 77 , 240 S.E.2d 639 (1977) (comment on failure to produce witness permissible); State v. Cook, 283 S.C. 594 , 325 S.E.2d 323 (1985) (no error in allowing solicitor to comment on defendant’s failure to produce his wife); State v. Shackelford, 228 S.C. 9 , 88 S.E.2d 778 (1955) (not improper for prosecutor to comment upon defendant’s failure to produce witnesses, accessible to the accused, or under his control, whose testimony would substantiate his story). However, in Davis v. Sparks, 235 S.C. 326, 333 , 111 S.E.2d 545, 549 (1959), we recognized the general rule that “a party is not to be prejudiced by his failure to call a witness who is equally available to the other party.” Citing 20 Am.Jur. 193 Evidence, § 189.”
    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.