State v. Gregory’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 146 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 149 later decisions — most recently April 2018 · most notably State v. Fair (2001), State v. Call (1998)
3 federal appellate · 146 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 Batson v. Kentucky · Witherspoon v. Illinois · 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 149 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(i) to determine whether a basis for challenge for cause exists, and (ii) to enable counsel to intelligently exercise peremptory challenges.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Crump · State v. Anderson“"[The] North Carolina Rules of Evidence permit broad cross-examination of expert witnesses. N.C.G.S. § 8C-1, Rule 611(b) (1992). The State is permitted to question an expert to obtain further details with regard to his testimony on direct examination, to impeach the witness or attack his credibility, or to elicit new and different evidence relevant to the case as a whole. `"The largest possible scope should be given," and "almost any question" may be put "to test the value of his testimony."` 1 Henry Brandis, Jr., Brandis on North Carolina Evidence § 42 (3d ed. 1988) (footnotes omitted) (citations omitted)."”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“[T]hese issues are not proper preservation issues because they are not determined solely by principles of law upon which this Court has previously ruled. Rather, these assignments of error are fact specific requiring review of the transcript and record to determine if the assignment has merit. Where counsel determines that an issue of this nature does not have merit, counsel should “omit it entirely from his or her argument on appeal.” State v. Barton, 335 N.C. 696, 712 , 441 S.E.2d 295, 303 (1994).”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. State v. Locklear · State v. Conner
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.