Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 343 N.C. 291 - State v. Exum

State v. Exum’s Empirical Analysis

1996

Citation profile

14
cited by 14 later decisions
1
states following
June 2011
most recently cited

14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently June 2011

14 state decisions

100199620002010decided

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 Pointer v. Texas · Granito v. United States · State v. Artis · International Union of Operating Engineers, Local 406 v. Guidry · State v. Moore

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

  1. “The Court: All right. Members of the jury, we’re going to take our lunch break now — well, let me confer with the lawyers a minute. Sheriff, take the jury back in the jury room. (The jury is absent.) The Witness: Can I be excused, Judge? The Court: Wait just a moment. (A discussion off the record in chambers with the Court and all four counsel. The defendant was not present.) The Court: All right. Let’s — I think you’re excused, Dr. Brown.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “However, error caused by the absence of the defendant at some portion of his capital trial does not require automatic reversal. This Court has adopted the “harmless error” analysis in cases where a defendant is absent during a portion of his capital trial. The State has the burden of establishing that the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “because the in-chambers conference was not recorded and the nature and content of the private discussion cannot be gleaned from the record, the State failed to meet its burden of showing the error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt, and we are, therefore, required to order a new trial.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.