Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 342 N.C. 667 - State v. DeCastro

State v. DeCastro’s Empirical Analysis

1996

Citation profile

30
cited by 30 later decisions
1
states following
July 2017
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 28 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently July 2017 · most notably State v. Golphin (2000), State v. Grooms (2000)

2 federal appellate · 28 state decisions

120199620002010decided

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 Edwards v. Arizona · Gregg v. Georgia · Rhode Island v. Innis · Witherspoon v. Illinois · Eddings v. Oklahoma

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

  1. ““Under our rules of evidence, unless otherwise provided, all relevant evidence is admissible. N.C.G.S. § 8C-1, Rule 402 (1988). ‘ “Relevant evidence” means evidence having any tendency to make the existence of any fact that is of consequence to the determination of the action more probable or less probable than it would be without the evidence.’ N.C.G.S. § 8C-1, Rule 401 (1988). In criminal cases, ‘ “[E]very circumstance that is calculated to throw any light upon the supposed crime is admissible. The weight of such evidence is for the jury.” ’ State v. Whiteside, 325 N.C. 389, 397 , 383 S.E.2d 911, 915 (1989) (quoting State v. Hamilton, 264 N.C. 277, 286-87 , 141 S.E.2d 506, 513 (1965), cert. denied, 384 U.S. 1020 , 16 L. Ed. 2d 1044 (1966)).””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “was not the result of interrogation in derogation of defendant's right to have an attorney present during questioning. The question by Detective Berube regarding whether defendant could keep the money from his pocket was not directed to defendant, but to Agent McDougall.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “the detective's question, made in defendant's presence while he was in police custody, could have been perceived by defendant as seeking a response”
    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.