Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 82 N.C. App. 682 - State v. Thomas

82 N.C. App. 682 - State v. Thomas’s Empirical Analysis

1986

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
1
states following
July 2005
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently July 2005

4 federal appellate · 14 state decisions

80198619902000decided

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 National Labor Relations Board v. Burns International Security Services, Inc. · State v. Allen · State v. Tyndall · 67 N.C. App. 655 - State v. Aldridge

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

  1. “The only reason for establishing that an accused is an habitual felon is to enhance the punishment which would otherwise be appropriate for the substantive felony which he has allegedly committed while in such a status. The effect of such a proceeding “is to enhance the punishment of those found guilty of crime who are also shown to have been convicted of other crimes in the past.” Spencer v. Texas, supra, 385 U.S. at 556. Being an habitual felon is not a crime but is a status the attaining of which subjects a person thereafter convicted of a crime to an increased punishment for that crime. The status itself, standing alone, will not support a criminal sentence. “The habitual criminal act . . . does not create a new and separate criminal offense for which a person may be separately sentenced but provides merely that the repetition of criminal conduct aggravates the guilt and justifies greater punishment than ordinarily would be considered.” State v. Tyndall, 187 Neb. 48, 50 , 187 N.W.2d 298, 300 , cert. denied sub nom. Goham v. Nebraska, 404 U.S. 1004 (1971).”
    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.