Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
6 North Carolina opinions name it 2 courts 2024–2026 6 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by North Carolina courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
State v. Rebergreen2 sentences2026“This is an exceedingly high bar.” Reber, 386 N.C. at 163, 900 S.E.2d at 789. 2026“This is an exceedingly high bar.” Reber, 386 N.C. at 163, 900 S.E.2d at 789. | 3 | 5 |
State v. Jonesgreen2 sentences2026It applies only when the prosecutor’s statements went so far beyond the ‘parameters of propriety’ that the trial court is forced to intervene to ‘protect the rights of the parties and the sanctity of the proceedings.’” State v. Reber, 386 N.C. 153 , 163 (2024) (quoting Jones, 355 N.C. at 133 ). 2024It applies only when the prosecutor’s statements went so far beyond the “parameters of propriety” that the trial court is forced to intervene to “protect the rights of the parties and the sanctity of the proceedings.” State v. Jones, 355 N.C. 117, 133 (2002). | 1 | 2 |
State v. Sextongreen2 sentences2026Moreover, if there is “overwhelming evidence against a defendant,” our Courts “have not found statements that are improper to amount to prejudice and reversible error.” Huey, 370 N.C. at 181 , 804 S.E.2d at 470 ; see also, e.g., State v. Sexton, 336 N.C. 321, 363 , 444 S.E.2d 879, 903 (1994) (internal citations omitted) (“While the statements constituted error, defendant has the burden of showing that the error was prejudicial. 2026Moreover, if there is “overwhelming evidence against a defendant,” our Courts “have not found statements that are improper to amount to prejudice and reversible error.” Huey, 370 N.C. at 181 , 804 S.E.2d at 470 ; see also, e.g., State v. Sexton, 336 N.C. 321, 363 , 444 S.E.2d 879, 903 (1994) (internal citations omitted) (“While the statements constituted error, defendant has the burden of showing that the error was prejudicial. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Gibbsgreen2 sentences2025“In determining whether the remarks were grossly improper, we consider the context in which the remarks were made, as well as their brevity relative to the -5- closing argument as a whole.” Wright, ___ N.C. App. at ___, 920 S.E.2d at 256 (cleaned up); see also State v. Gibbs, 335 N.C. 1, 64 , 436 S.E.2d 321, 357 (1993) (“Prosecutorial statements are not placed in an isolated vacuum on appeal. 2025“In determining whether the remarks were grossly improper, we consider the context in which the remarks were made, as well as their brevity relative to the -5- closing argument as a whole.” Wright, ___ N.C. App. at ___, 920 S.E.2d at 256 (cleaned up); see also State v. Gibbs, 335 N.C. 1, 64 , 436 S.E.2d 321, 357 (1993) (“Prosecutorial statements are not placed in an isolated vacuum on appeal. | 1 | 1 |
State v. Wrightgreen1 sentence2025“In determining whether the remarks were grossly improper, we consider the context in which the remarks were made, as well as their brevity relative to the -5- closing argument as a whole.” Wright, ___ N.C. App. at ___, 920 S.E.2d at 256 (cleaned up); see also State v. Gibbs, 335 N.C. 1, 64 , 436 S.E.2d 321, 357 (1993) (“Prosecutorial statements are not placed in an isolated vacuum on appeal. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in North Carolina. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Huey
green
2 sentences2026Moreover, if there is “overwhelming evidence against a defendant,” our Courts “have not found statements that are improper to amount to prejudice and reversible error.” Huey, 370 N.C. at 181 , 804 S.E.2d at 470 ; see also, e.g., State v. Sexton, 336 N.C. 321, 363 , 444 S.E.2d 879, 903 (1994) (internal citations omitted) (“While the statements constituted error, defendant has the burden of showing that the error was prejudicial. 2026Moreover, if there is “overwhelming evidence against a defendant,” our Courts “have not found statements that are improper to amount to prejudice and reversible error.” Huey, 370 N.C. at 181 , 804 S.E.2d at 470 ; see also, e.g., State v. Sexton, 336 N.C. 321, 363 , 444 S.E.2d 879, 903 (1994) (internal citations omitted) (“While the statements constituted error, defendant has the burden of showing that the error was prejudicial. | 1 | 2026–2026 |
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.