State v. Herring’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently July 2019
12 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. Goodman · State v. Cummings · State v. Robbins · State v. Mash · State v. Adcock
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.
“A defendant who wants to raise the issue of whether he was so intoxicated by the voluntary consumption of alcohol or other drugs that he did not form a deliberate and premeditated intent to kill has the burden of producing evidence, or relying on the evidence produced by the state , of his intoxication.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“A defendant who wants to raise the issue of whether he was so intoxicated by the voluntary consumption of alcohol or other drugs “that he did not form a deliberate and premeditated intent to kill has the burden of producing evidence, or relying on the evidence produced by the state, of his intoxication.” State v. Mash, 323 N.C. 339, 346 , 372 S.E.2d 532, 536 (1988). “Evidence of mere intoxication” does not meet this burden. Id. The defendant “must produce substantial evidence which would support a conclusion by the judge that he was so intoxicated that he could not form a deliberate and premeditated intent to kill.” Id. The evidence on which the defendant relies must show that at the time of the killing the defendant’s mind and reason were so completely intoxicated and overthrown as to render him utterly incapable of forming a deliberate and premeditated purpose to kill. State v. Shelton, 164 N.C. 513 , 79 S.E. 883 (1913)[, overruled on other grounds by State v. Oates, 249 N.C. 282 , 106 S.E.2d 206 (1958)]. In absence of some evidence of intoxication to such degree, the court is not required to charge the jury thereon. State v. McLaughlin, 286 N.C. 597 , 213 S.E.2d 238 (1975)[, death sentence vacated, 428 U.S. 903 , 49 L. Ed. 2d 1208 (1976)]. Mash, 323 N.C. at 346 , 372 S.E.2d at 536 (quoting State v. Strickland, 321 N.C. 31, 41 , 361 S.E.2d 882, 888 (1987)).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Scott“In the absence of some evidence of intoxication to such degree, the court is not required to charge the jury thereon.”
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.