Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 336 N.C. 78 - State v. Robinson

State v. Robinson’s Empirical Analysis

1994

Citation profile

210
cited by 210 later decisions
4
states following
July 2018
most recently cited

205 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 210 later decisions — most recently July 2018 · most notably State v. Rose (1994), State v. Barnes (1997)

205 state decisions

1420199420002010decided

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 Batson v. Kentucky · Anderson v. City of Bessemer City · Lockett v. Ohio · Wainwright v. Witt · Hernandez v. New York

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

  1. ““Morgan stands for the principle that a defendant in a capital trial must be allowed to make inquiry as to whether a particular juror would automatically vote for the death penalty. ‘Within this broad principle, however, the trial court has broad discretion to see that a competent, fair, and impartial jury is impaneled; its rulings in this regard will not be reversed absent a showing of abuse of discretion.’ State v. Yelverton, 334 N.C. 532, 541 , 434 S.E.2d 183, 188 (1993).””
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “to eliminate the possibility that a person will be sentenced to die by the action of an aberrant jury.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “[a]s a check against the capricious or random imposition of the death penalty.”
    4 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.