49 N.C. App. 561 - State v. Jordan’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
26 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently September 2018 · most notably 171 N.C. App. 518 - State v. Tutt (2005), 133 N.C. App. 93 - Couch v. Private Diagnostic Clinic (1999)
26 state decisions
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 Neil v. Biggers · Stovall v. Denno · Foster v. California · Cole v. United States · Johnson v. United States
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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Failure to object at trial is normally held to constitute a waiver of the error.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“The general rule in this State is that the failure ... to hold a voir dire examination and make findings of fact upon objection by a defendant to an in-court identification, while not approved, will be deemed harmless error where the record shows that the pretrial identification was proper or that the in-court identification of defendant had an origin independent from the pretrial identification.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[t]he record discloses that defendant’s trial counsel presented evidence on the defendant’s behalf, entered objections to the State’s evidence, and conducted effective cross-examination of the State’s witnesses. It is quite clear that defendant’s representation at trial was not so lacking that [her] trial became a farce and mockery of justice.”
1 later decision 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.