Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 40 N.C. App. 385 - State v. Poe

40 N.C. App. 385 - State v. Poe’s Empirical Analysis

1979

Citation profile

37
cited by 37 later decisions
3
states following
July 2012
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 2 district · 32 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 37 later decisions — most recently July 2012 · most notably Jackson v. Bumgardner (1986), Schochet v. State (1990)

1 federal appellate · 2 district · 32 state decisions

24019791980199020002010decided

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 Griswold v. State of Connecticut · Eisenstadt v. Baird · O’Callahan v. Parker, Warden · Ingraham v. Wright · Federal Energy Administration v. Algonquin SNG, Inc.

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

  1. ““Conceding for purposes of argument that a husband or wife could not be prosecuted for engaging in fellatio in private with his or her spouse, we do not believe it creates an unreasonable class to treat unmarried persons differently. The state can forbid certain types of sexual conduct. The statute under which the defendant was prosecuted forbids homosexual as well as heterosexual unnatural sex acts. It has been upheld as to homosexual acts____ In this state, fornication and adultery have been proscribed since at least 1805, G.S. 14-184. We believe the state, consistent with the Fourteenth Amendment, can classify unmarried persons so as to prohibit fellatio between males and females without forbidding the same acts between married couples. We hold that the constitutional right of privacy does not protect the defendant in this case.””
    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.