green
Positive treatment
Quoted verbatim 2×
10.0 score
G Cite
cited 2× by 1 distinct case, last quoted 2008 ·
…the charge must contain an accurate statement of the law and must set out all the essential elements of the offense.
⚠ not in text
Treatment trajectory · 1997 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1997
2011
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 36 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
Scott v. State
(2×)
the charge must contain an accurate statement of the law and must set out all the essential elements of the offense.
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
State v. Cole
prosecutorial statements are not placed in an isolated vacuum on appeal. fair consideration must be given to the context in which the remarks were made and to the overall factual circumstances to which they refer
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Melvin
See State v. Rouse, 339 N.C. 59, 81 , 451 S.E.2d 543, 555 (1994) (finding no plain error in excluding evidence even though any error arguably had been invited), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 832 , 133 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
Hernandez-Devereaux v. Astrue
See, cf., Disabled Rights Union v. Shalala, 40 F.3d 1018, 1022 (9th Cir.), cert denied, 516 U.S. 832 , 116 S.Ct. 105 , 133 L.Ed.2d 58 (1995) (setting forth standard test for procedural due process), citing Mathews v. Eldridge, 424 U.S. 319, 335 , 96 S.Ct. 893 , 47 L.Ed.2d 18 (1976).
cited
Cited "see"
in Re Dewey MacK Evans
See Dinkins v. State, 894 S.W.2d 330, 339 (Tex.Crim.App. 1995), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 832 , 116 S. Ct. 106 , 133 L.
cited
Cited "see"
George W. Scott v. State
See Dinkins v. State, 894 S.W.2d 330, 339 (Tex.Crim.App. 1995), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 832 , 116 S. Ct. 106 , 133 L.
cited
Cited "see"
George W. Scott v. State
See Dinkins v. State, 894 S.W.2d 330, 339 (Tex.Crim.App. 1995), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 832 , 116 S. Ct. 106 , 133 L.
cited
Cited "see"
George W. Scott v. State
See Dinkins v. State, 894 S.W.2d 330 , 8 339 (Tex.Crim.App. 1995), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 832 , 116 S. Ct. 106 , 133 L.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Roache
See State v. Rouse, 339 N.C. 59, 91-92 , 451 S.E.2d 543, 560-61 (1994), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 832 , 133 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Wiley
See State v. Rouse, 339 N.C. 59, 93 , 451 S.E.2d 543, 561-62 (1994) (holding that the prosecutor may make statements during closing arguments discouraging the jury from sympathy unrelated to the evidence affecting its decision), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 832 , 133 L.
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Call
Finally, we have held that prosecutors “may properly argue to the sentencing jury that its decision should be based not on sympathy, mercy, or whether it wants to kill the defendant, but on the law.” Frye, 341 N.C. at 506 , 461 S.E.2d at 683 ; accord State v. Rouse, 339 N.C. 59, 93 , 451 S.E.2d 543, 561-62 (1994), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 832 , 133 L.
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Mitchell
See State v. Rouse, 339 N.C. 59, 95-96 , 451 S.E.2d 543, 563 (1994), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 832 , 133 L.
cited
Cited "see"
In re J.S.
See Dinkins v. State, 894 S.W.2d 330, 347 (Tex. Crim.App.), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 832 , 116 S.Ct. 106 , 133 L.Ed.2d 59 (1995).
cited
Cited "see"
In Re JS
See Dinkins v. State, 894 S.W.2d 330, 347 (Tex. Crim.App.), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 832 , 116 S.Ct. 106 , 133 L.Ed.2d 59 (1995).
discussed
Cited "see"
Mansfield v. State
See Guzman v. State, 721 So.2d 1155, 1160 (Fla. 1998) (rejecting the unconsciousness argument where the victim's blood alcohol level was .34, citing, Whitton v. State, 649 So.2d 861 (Fla.1994)), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 832 , 116 S.Ct. 106 , 133 L.Ed.2d 59 (1995).
cited
Cited "see"
Veteto v. State
P. 44.2(a); See Dinkins v. State, 894 S.W.2d 330, 356 (Tex.Crim.App.), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 832 , 116 S.Ct. 106 , 133 L.Ed.2d 59 (1995).
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Thomas
See State v. Rouse, 339 N.C. 59, 92 , 451 S.E.2d 543, 561 (1994) (defendant was characterized as a *362 “maniac,” a “mean, cold-blooded killer,” and a “violent killer”), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 832 , 133 L.
cited
Cited "see"
Fuentes v. State
See Dinkins v. State, 894 S.W.2d 330, 357 (Tex.Crim.App.), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 832 , 116 S.Ct. 106 , 133 L.Ed.2d 59 (1995).
discussed
Cited "see"
Angelo v. State
(2×)
See Dinkins v. State, 894 S.W.2d 330, 355 (Tex.Crim.App.) (objection should be made as soon as ground for objection becomes apparent in order to preserve error), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 832 , 116 S.Ct. 106 , 133 L.Ed.2d 59 (1995).
discussed
Cited "see"
Caldwell v. State
(2×)
See Dinkins v. State, 894 S.W.2d 330, 339 (Tex.Crim.App.), cert, denied, 516 U.S. 832 , 116 S.Ct. 106 , 133 L.Ed.2d 59 (1995).
cited
Cited "see"
Hughbank v. State
See Dinkins v. State, 894 S.W.2d 330, 355 (Tex.Crim.App.), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 832 , 116 S.Ct. 106 , 133 L.Ed.2d 59 (1995).
discussed
Cited "see"
Bolden v. State
See Dinkins v. State, 894 S.W.2d 330, 357 (Tex.Crim.App.), cer t. denied, 516 U.S. 832 , 116 S.Ct. 106 , 133 L.Ed.2d 59 (1995); McKay v. State, 707 S.W.2d 23, 37 (Tex.Crim.App.1985), ce rt. denied, 479 U.S. 871 , 107 S.Ct. 239 , 93 L.Ed.2d 164 (1986); Faulkner, 940 S.W.2d at 312 .
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Mario Fonseca v. State
I, § 10; TEX .CODE CRIM .PROC.ANN . art. 38.08 (West 2010)(the failure of any defendant to testify in his own behalf shall not be taken as a circumstance against him or be alluded to or commented upon 6 Miranda v. Arizona, 384 U.S. 436 , 86 S.Ct 1602 , 16 L.Ed.2d 694 (1966). by counsel); see also Franklin v. State, 693 S.W.2d 420, 428 (Tex.Crim.App. 1985)(stating that Article 38.22 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has consistently been construed as prohibiting proof of an accused’s silence while under arrest and which tends to communicate thoughts of the defendant of an incriminating natur…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Mario Fonseca v. State
I, § 10; Tex.Code Crim.Proc.Ann . art. 38.08 (West 2010)(the failure of any defendant to testify in his own behalf shall not be taken as a circumstance against him or be alluded to or commented upon by counsel); see also Franklin v. State , 693 S.W.2d 420, 428 (Tex.Crim.App. 1985)(stating that Article 38.22 of the Code of Criminal Procedure has consistently been construed as prohibiting proof of an accused’s silence while under arrest and which tends to communicate thoughts of the defendant of an incriminating nature); see, e.g., Dinkins v. State , 894 S.W.2d 330, 356 (Tex.Crim.App. 1995), …
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Phillips
Ed. 2d 7 (1990); see also State v. Rouse, 339 N.C. 59, 93 , 451 S.E.2d 543, 561 (1994) (noting that “the prosecutor may discourage the jury from having mere sympathy not related to the evidence in the case affect its decision” (citation omitted)), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 832 , 133 L.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Ratliff v. State
See Marini v. State, 593 S.W.2d 709, 714 (Tex.Crim.App. [Panel Op.] 1980) (explaining that an objection to evidence “must be urged at the earliest opportunity”); Stults, 23 S.W.3d at 205-06 ; Angelo v. State, 977 S.W.2d 169, 177 (TexApp.-Austin 1998, pet. dism’d w.o.j.) (op. on reh’g); see also Dinkins v. State, 894 S.W.2d 330, 355 (Tex.Crim.App.) (explaining that “if a question clearly calls for an objectionable response, a defendant should make an objection before the witness responds”), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 832 , 116 S.Ct. 106 , 133 L.Ed.2d 59 (1995).
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
Berkley v. State
See, e.g., Dinkins v. State, 894 S.W.2d 330, 357 (Tex.Crim.App.), cer t. denied, 516 U.S. 832 , 116 S.Ct. 106 , 133 L.Ed.2d 59 (1995).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Garcell
See, e.g., State v. Rouse, 339 N.C. 59, 76 , 451 S.E.2d 543, 552 (1994) (noting prospective juror’s statement that “ I don’t believe I could vote for the death penalty’ ”), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 832 (1995), overruled in part on other grounds by State v. Hurst, 360 N.C. 181 , 624 S.E.2d 309 , cert. denied, 549 U.S. 875 (2006); State v. Skipper, 337 N.C. 1, 17-18 , 446 S.E.2d 252, 260 (1994) (noting that juror’s thoughts and views regarding death penalty seemed conflicting, but evinced a substantial impairment in her ability to follow the law), cert. denied, 513 U.S. 1134 (1995), su…
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Smith
See also State v. Rouse, 339 N.C. 59, 95-96 , 451 S.E.2d 543, 563 (1994), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 832 , 133 L.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Aguirre, Eduardo v. State
"Ordinarily, any injury from improper jury argument is obviated when the court instructs the jury to disregard, unless the remark is so inflammatory that its prejudicial effect cannot reasonably be removed by such an admonishment." Bower v. State , 769 S.W.2d 887, 907 (Tex.Crim.App.), cert. denied , 492 U.S. 927 , 109 S.Ct. 3266 , 106 L.Ed.2d 611 (1989); see also Dinkins v. State , 894 S.W.2d 330, 356 (Tex.Crim.App.), cert. denied , 516 U.S. 832 , 116 S.Ct. 106 , 133 L.Ed.2d 59 (1995); Jackson v. State , 745 S.W.2d 4, 15 (Tex.Crim.App.), cert. denied , 487 U.S. 1241 , 108 S.Ct. 2916 , 101 L.Ed…
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Haselden
(2×)
Ed. 2d 818 (1995); see also State v. Rouse, 339 N.C. 59, 94 , 451 S.E.2d 543, 562 (1994), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 832 , 133 L.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
State v. Prevatte
Id. at 326, 543 S.E.2d at 841 ; see also State v. Rouse, 339 N.C. 59, 96 , 451 S.E.2d 543, 563 (1994), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 832 , 133 L.
cited
Cited "see, e.g."
McCullough v. State
See, e.g., Dinkins v. State, 894 S.W.2d 330, 347-48 (Tex.Crim.App.1995), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 832 , 116 S.Ct. 106 , 133 L.Ed.2d 59 (1995).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Chris Durant Haywood v. State of Texas
Crane v. State, 786 S.W.2d 338, 352 (Tex.Cr.App. 1990); see also Dinkins 4 v. State, 894 S.W.2d 330, 347-48 (Tex.Cr.App 1995), cert. denied, 516 U.S. 832 , 116 S.Ct. 106 , 133 L.Ed.2d 59 (1995) (holding that an appointment book and application form containing the defendant’s name were not inadmissible hearsay because they were admitted to explain how the defendant became a part of the police investigation).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Chris Durant Haywood v. State of Texas
Crane v. State, 786 S.W.2d 338, 352 (Tex.Cr.App. 1990); see also Dinkins v. State, 894 S.W.2d 330, 347-48 (Tex.Cr.App 1995), cert. denied , 516 U.S. 832 , 116 S.Ct. 106 , 133 L.Ed.2d 59 (1995) (holding that an appointment book and application form containing the defendant’s name were not inadmissible hearsay because they were admitted to explain how the defendant became a part of the police investigation).
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Chris Durant Haywood v. State of Texas
Crane v. State, 786 S.W.2d 338, 352 (Tex.Cr.App. 1990); see also Dinkins v. State, 894 S.W.2d 330, 347-48 (Tex.Cr.App 1995), cert. denied , 516 U.S. 832 , 116 S.Ct. 106 , 133 L.Ed.2d 59 (1995) (holding that an appointment book and application form containing the defendant's name were not inadmissible hearsay because they were admitted to explain how the defendant became a part of the police investigation).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Stiff
v.
New York
v.
New York
No. 94-9364.
Supreme Court of the United States.
Oct 2, 1995.
App. Div., Sup. Ct. N. Y., 2d Jud. Dept. Certiorari denied.