How cited: State v. Green · Go Syfert

State v. Green (1989)

green · 40 citation events across 4 courts. Showing the 9 strongest citers on record (one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 1989 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
198920072026
Rule Authority · N.C. · 2 citations in this opinion
State v. Robinson, 330 N.C. 1, 16 , 409 S.E.2d 288, 296 (1991); State v. Green, 324 N.C. 238, 240 , 376 S.E.2d 727, 728 (1989).
green State v. Robinson (1991)
Rule Authority · N.C. · 2 citations in this opinion
State v. Greene, 324 N.C. 238, 240 , 376 S.E.2d 727, 728 (1989); cf. McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Green, 411 U.S. 792, 804 , 36 L.
green State v. Cofield (1998)
Rule Authority
State v. Peterson, 344 N.C. 172, 176 , 472 S.E.2d 730, 732 (1996); State v. Green, 324 N.C. 238, 240 , 376 S.E.2d 727, 728 (1989).
green State v. Williams (1994)
Rule Authority · N.C.
State v. Green, 324 N.C. 238, 240 , 376 S.E.2d 727, 728 (1989). *17 In the case at bar the prosecutor volunteered his explanations, and the trial court ruled that there was no purposeful discrimination.
green State v. Porter (1990)
Rule Authority
State v. Greene, 324 N.C. 238, 240 , 376 S.E.2d 727, 728 (1989); see also Stanley v. State, 313 Md. 50, 62 , 542 A.2d 1267, 1272-73 (1988); State v. Antwine, 743 S.W.2d 51, 64 (Mo. 1987) (en banc), cert. denied, 486 U.S. 1017 , 100 L.
en banc
green Gray v. State (1989)
Rule Authority · Md.
See, e.g., United States v. Roan Eagle, 867 F.2d 436, 441 (8th Cir.), cert. denied, — U.S.-, 109 S.Ct. 1764 , 104 L.Ed.2d 199 (1989); United States v. Lane, 866 F.2d 103, 104 (4th Cir.1989); United States v. Tindle, 860 F.2d 125, 130-31 (4th Cir.1988), cert. denied, — U.S. -, 109 S.Ct. 3176 , 104 L.Ed.2d 1038 (1989); United States v. Garrison, supra, 849 F.2d at 106-07 ; United States v. Thompson, supra, 827 F.2d at 1259-61 ; State v. Green, 324 N.C. 238 , 376 S.E.2d 727, 72
green State v. Sessoms (1995)
Cited (see also) · N.C. Ct. App. · signal: see also · 4 citations in this opinion
The Court added “[w]e know of no reason why the defendant should be allowed to examine a prosecuting attorney at a post trial hearing if he could not do so at trial.” Id; see also State v. Green, 324 N.C. 238 , 376 S.E.2d 727 (1989); State v. Porter, 326 N.C. 489 , 391 S.E.2d 144 (1990).
green State v. Hall (1991)
Cited · N.C. Ct. App. · signal: see · 2 citations in this opinion
See State v. Green, 324 N.C. 238, 241 , 376 S.E.2d 727, 728 (1989) (where trial court erred in conducting Batson hearing, case remanded for new Batson hearing); cf. State v. Booker, 306 N.C. 302, 313 , 293 S.E.2d 78, 84 (1982) (where prejudicial'error occurs on issue not fully resolved by trial court, appellate court may remand to trial court for appropriate proceedings to determine issue without new trial).
where trial court erred in conducting Batson hearing, case remanded for new Batson hearing
green State v. Sanders (1989)
Cited (see also) · N.C. Ct. App. · signal: see also · 2 citations in this opinion
See State v. Perry, 250 N.C. 119, 124 , 108 S.E.2d 447, 451 , cert. denied, 361 U.S. 833 , 4 L.Ed.2d 74 (1959) (specific findings made where composition of jury was challenged); see also State v. Greene, 324 N.C. 238 , 376 S.E.2d 727 (1989) (case remanded for findings of fact and conclusions of law from a Batson hearing).
case remanded for findings of fact and conclusions of law from a Batson hearing