59 N.C. App. 84 - State v. Freeman’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
5 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 5 later decisions — most recently August 2003
5 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 State v. Cronin · State v. Bracey · State v. Sanders · 50 N.C. App. 736 - State v. Byrd · 55 N.C. App. 612 - State v. Bost
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We believe the false pretense for which the defendant was charged in Lincoln County and the aiding and abetting false pretense for which the defendant was convicted in Mecklenburg County were part of the same scheme or plan. See State v. Bracey, 303 N.C. 112 , 277 S.E. 2d 390 (1981). The Lincoln County charges were not dismissed under G.S. 15A-703 or on a finding of no probable cause. The trial in Mecklenburg County was not held within 120 days of the indictment in Lincoln County which delay violated the provisions of G.S. 15A-701(al). See State v. Norwood, — N.C. App. —, 291 S.E. 2d 835 (1982); State v. Walden, 53 N.C. App. 196 , 280 S.E. 2d 505 (1981); and State v. Dunbar, 47 N.C. App. 623 , 267 S.E. 2d 577 (1980).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Freeman
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.