65 N.C. App. 359 - State v. Bradley’s Empirical Analysis
1983
Citation profile
27 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 27 later decisions — most recently December 2010 · most notably State v. Thomas (1999), State v. McClintick (1986)
27 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. Powell · State v. Monk · State v. Calloway · 6 N.C. App. 66 - State v. Blackmon · State v. Miller
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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Defendant's requested instruction concerned a subordinate feature of the case since it did not relate to elements of the crime itself nor to defendant's criminal responsibility therefore. Absent defendant's request, the jury instructions would have been entirely proper since a Court is not required to give instructions on subordinate features of a case. When a requested instruction, however, is correct in law and supported by the evidence, the Court must give the instruction in substance. The requested instruction in the instant case was a correct application of the law to the evidence. The failure to so instruct constituted prejudicial error, entitling defendant to a new trial.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Defendant's requested instruction [i.e. `that fingerprints corresponding to those of the accused were without probative force unless the circumstances showed that they could have only been impressed at the time the crime was committed,' Id. 65 N.C.App. at 363 , 309 S.E.2d at 513 ] concerned a subordinate feature of the case since it did not relate to the elements of the crime itself nor to defendant's criminal responsibility therefore.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“the trial court . . . considered] the evidence in the light most favorable to the State, [having] giv[en] the State the benefit of every reasonable inference which may be drawn. [However,] [t]he State is still “required to produce substantial evidence more than a scintilla to prove the allegations in the bill of indictment.””
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.