Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 84 N.C. App. 228 - State v. Knoll

84 N.C. App. 228 - State v. Knoll’s Empirical Analysis

1987

Citation profile

15
cited by 15 later decisions
1
states following
December 2010
most recently cited

15 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 15 later decisions — most recently December 2010

15 state decisions

701987199020002010decided

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 People v. Defore · 175 Cal. App. 2d 862 - In re Newbern · State v. Dietz · State v. . Carroll · Fast v. Gulley

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

  1. “[b]ecause of the change in North Carolina’s driving while intoxicated laws, denial of access is no longer inherently prejudicial to a defendant’s ability to gather evidence in support of his innocence in every driving while impaired case. While denial of access was clearly prejudicial in Hill, under the current 0.10 statute, a defendant’s only opportunity to obtain evidence is not lost automatically, when he is detained, and improperly denied access to friends and family. Prejudice may or may not occur since a chemical analysis result of 0.10 or more is sufficient, on its face, to convict.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “(c) In determining which conditions of release to impose, the judicial official must, on the basis of available information, take into account the nature and circumstances of the offense charged; the weight of the evidence against the defendant; . . . whether the defendant is intoxicated to such a degree that he would be endangered by being released without supervision; . . . and any other evidence relevant to the issue of pretrial release.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “(b) Statement by the Magistrate. — The magistrate must inform the defendant of: (1) The charges against him; (2) His right to communicate with counsel and friends; and (3) The general circumstances under which he may secure release under the provisions of Article 26, Bail.”
    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.