State v. Fleming’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

93 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 93 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “A detailed chain of custody need be established only when the evidence offered is not readily identifiable or is susceptible to alteration and there is reason to believe that it may have been altered.”

   5 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 170 N.C. App. 336 - State v. Berryman · 204 N.C. App. 211 - State v. Autry

2. “The judge may not express during any stage of the trial, any opinion in the presence of the jury on any question of fact to be decided by the jury. N.C.G.S. § 15A-1222 (1997) . . . ‘The law imposes on the trial judge the duty of absolute impartiality.’ Nowell v. Neal, 249 N.C. 516, 520 , 107 S.E.2d 107, 110 (1959). The trial judge also has the duty to supervise and control a defendant’s trial, including the direct and cross-examination of witnesses, to ensure fair and impartial justice for both parties. State v. Agnew, 294 N.C. 382, 395 , 241 S.E.2d 684, 692 , cert. denied, 439 U.S. 830 , 58 L. Ed. 2d 124 (1978). ‘Furthermore, it is well recognized that a trial judge has a duty to question a witness in order to clarify his testimony or to elicit overlooked pertinent facts.’ State v. Rogers, 326 N.C. at 220, 341 S.E.2d at 723; see also State v. Jackson, 306 N.C. 642, 651 , 295 S.E.2d 383, 388 (1982). ‘In evaluating whether a judge’s comments cross into the realm of impermissible opinion, a totality of the circumstances test is utilized.’ [State v.] Larrimore, 340 N.C. [119,] 155, 456 S.E.2d [789,]808 [(1995)]. ‘The trial court has a duty to control the examination of witnesses, both for the purpose of conserving the trial court’s time and for the purpose of protecting the witness from prolonged, needless, or abusive examination.’ State v. White, 340 N.C. 264, 299 , 457 S.E.2d 841, 861 , cert. denied, [516] U.S. [994], 133 L. Ed. 2d 436 (1995). In performing this duty, however,”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. 143 N.C. App. 485 - State v. Pickard · 202 N.C. App. 771 - State v. Arrington

3. “(d) The prosecutor must conduct his examination of the first 12 jurors seated and make his challenges for cause and exercise his peremptory challenges. If the judge allows a challenge for cause, or if a peremptory challenge is exercised, the clerk must immediately call a replacement into the box. When the prosecu tor is satisfied with the 12 in the box, they must then be tendered to the defendant. Until the prosecutor indicates his satisfaction, he may make a challenge for cause or exercise a peremptory challenge to strike any juror, whether an original or replacement juror. (e) Each defendant must then conduct his examination of the jurors tendered him, making his challenges for cause and his peremptory challenges. If a juror is excused, no replacement may be called until all defendants have indicated satisfaction with those remaining, at which time the clerk must call replacements for the jurors excused. The judge in his discretion must determine order of examination among multiple defendants. (f) Upon the calling of replacement jurors, the prosecutor must examine the replacement jurors and indicate satisfaction with a completed panel of 12 before the replacement jurors are tendered to a defendant. Only replacement jurors may be examined and challenged. This procedure is repeated until all parties have accepted 12 jurors.”

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