86 N.C. App. 291 - State v. Melvin’s Empirical Analysis
1987
Citation profile
31 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 31 later decisions — most recently November 2018 · most notably State v. Popenhagen (2008), 109 N.C. App. 601 - State v. Rupe (1993)
31 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
Applies 12 U.S.C. § 1829B · 12 U.S.C. § 3401 (Right to Financial Privacy Act of 1978) · 31 U.S.C. § 5311 · 31 U.S.C. § 5317
Relies on Rakas v. Illinois · United States v. Jacobsen · United States v. Miller · California Bankers Assn. v. Shultz · State v. Smith
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 31 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he admission of irrelevant evidence is generally considered harmless error.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“A defendant is prejudiced by errors relating to rights arising other than under the Constitution of the United States when there is a reasonable possibility that, had the error in question not been committed, a different result would have been reached at the trial out of which the appeal arises. The burden of showing such prejudice under this subsection is upon the defendant. Prejudice also exists in any instance in which it is deemed to exist as a matter of law or error is deemed reversible per se.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“(1) [T]hat defendant, being more than sixteen years of age, acted as an agent or fiduciary for his principal; (2) that he received money or valuable property of his principal in the course of his employment and through his fiduciary relationship; and (3) that he fraudulently or knowingly and willfully misapplied or converted to his own use the money or valuable property of his principal which he had received in his fiduciary capacity.”
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.