Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 85 N.C. App. 123 - State v. Singleton

85 N.C. App. 123 - State v. Singleton’s Empirical Analysis

1987

Citation profile

26
cited by 26 later decisions
1
states following
January 2017
most recently cited

26 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently January 2017 · most notably 130 N.C. App. 692 - State v. Blackmon (1998), 141 N.C. App. 220 - State v. Youngs (2000)

26 state decisions

1001987199020002010decided

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 Maness v. Meyers · Dix v. Georgia · State v. Palmer · State v. Higginbottom · State v. Hill

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.

  1. “[a] plain and concise factual statement in each count which, without allegations of an evidentiary nature, asserts facts supporting every element of a criminal offense and the defendant's commission thereof with sufficient precision clearly to apprise the defendant or defendants of the conduct which is the subject of the accusation.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “THE JURORS for the State upon their oath present that between the 17th day of August, 1995, and the 17th day of August 1996, and in the county named above the defendant named above unlawfully, willfully and feloniously did take and attempt to take immoral, improper, and indecent liberties with the child named below for the purpose of arousing and gratifying sexual desire and did commit a lewd and lascivious act upon the body of the child named below. At the time of this offense, the child named below was under the age of 16 years and the defendant named above was over 16 years of age and at least five years older than the child. The name of the child is [“A”], against the form of the statute in such case made and provided and against the peace and dignity of the State.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “[a]n indictment couched in the language of the statute is generally sufficient to charge the statutory offense,”
    2 later decisions 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.