Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 335 N.C. 618 - State v. Conner

State v. Conner’s Empirical Analysis

1994

Citation profile

116
cited by 116 later decisions
3
states following
March 2011
most recently cited

3 federal appellate · 111 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 116 later decisions — most recently March 2011 · most notably State v. Rose (1994), State v. Call (1998)

3 federal appellate · 111 state decisions

730199420002010decided

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 Witherspoon v. Illinois · Wainwright v. Witt · Swain v. State of Alabama · Lord Electric Co. v. United States · Morgan v. Illinois

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

  1. “Deliberation means an intent to kill, carried out in a cool state of blood, in furtherance of a fixed design for revenge or to accomplish an unlawful purpose and not under the influence of a violent passion, suddenly aroused by lawful or just cause or legal provocation.”
    6 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Premeditation means that the act was thought out beforehand for some length of time, however short, but no particular amount of time is necessary for the mental process of premeditation.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “The prosecutor and the defense counsel, or the defendant if not represented by counsel, may personally question prospective jurors individually concerning their fitness and competency to serve as jurors in the case to determine whether there is a basis for a challenge for cause or whether to exercise a peremptory challenge. The prosecution or defense is not foreclosed from asking a question merely because the court has previously asked the same or similar question.”
    2 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.