35 N.C. App. 388 - State v. Jones’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 state decisions

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

1. “Character evidence is a subordinate and not a substantive feature of the trial. The trial court, in the absence of a specific request, need not give any instruction relative to the significance of character evidence. State v. Burell, 252 N.C. 115 , 113 S.E. 2d 16 (1960). When the trial court instructs the jury as to the significance of character evidence, however, the instructions must be correct and complete. The defendant testified in his own behalf. Thus, it was error for the trial court to instruct the jury that character evidence offered in his behalf could be considered as substantive evidence without additionally instructing that it could also be considered as bearing upon his credibility. State v. Wortham, 240 N.C. 132 , 81 S.E. 2d 254 (1954); State v. Moore, 185 N.C. 637 , 116 S.E. 161 (1923), and cases therein cited. The trial court’s omission in this regard was identical to those we have previously disapproved and will necessitate a new trial. State v. Adams, 11 N.C. App. 420, 421 , 181 S.E. 2d 194, 195 (1971).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Williams

2. “The evidence has been received with regard to the defendant’s reputation. Although good character or good reputation is not an excuse for crime, the law recognizes that a person of good character may be less likely to commit a crime than one who lacks that character. Therefore, if you believe from the evidence that the defendant has a good character you may consider this fact in your determination of the defendant’s guilt or innocence, and give it such weight as you decide it should receive in the case, with all the other evidence.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Williams