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.
7 North Carolina opinions name it 2 courts 1985–2012 0 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. Gordongreen2 sentences2012North Carolina courts have generally-been very liberal in admitting evidence of similar sex offenses under Rule 404(b), see State v. McCarty, 326 N.C. 782, 785 , 392 S.E.2d 359, 361 (1990), especially under the common plan or scheme exception, see State v. Gordon, 316 N.C. 497, 504 , 342 S.E.2d 509, 513 (1986). 2012North Carolina courts have generally-been very liberal in admitting evidence of similar sex offenses under Rule 404(b), see State v. McCarty, 326 N.C. 782, 785 , 392 S.E.2d 359, 361 (1990), especially under the common plan or scheme exception, see State v. Gordon, 316 N.C. 497, 504 , 342 S.E.2d 509, 513 (1986). | 4 | 4 |
State v. Efflergreen2 sentences1990State v. Effler, 309 N.C. 742, 748 , 309 S.E.2d 203, 207 (1983). 1990State v. Effler, 309 N.C. 742, 748 , 309 S.E.2d 203, 207 (1983). | 3 | 3 |
State v. McCartygreen2 sentences2012North Carolina courts have generally-been very liberal in admitting evidence of similar sex offenses under Rule 404(b), see State v. McCarty, 326 N.C. 782, 785 , 392 S.E.2d 359, 361 (1990), especially under the common plan or scheme exception, see State v. Gordon, 316 N.C. 497, 504 , 342 S.E.2d 509, 513 (1986). 2012North Carolina courts have generally-been very liberal in admitting evidence of similar sex offenses under Rule 404(b), see State v. McCarty, 326 N.C. 782, 785 , 392 S.E.2d 359, 361 (1990), especially under the common plan or scheme exception, see State v. Gordon, 316 N.C. 497, 504 , 342 S.E.2d 509, 513 (1986). | 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. Barfield
red
2 sentences1985In State v. Barfield, supra, the court explained the common plan or scheme exception this way: “Evidence of other offenses is admissible if it tends to show the existence of a plan or design to commit the offense charged, or to accomplish a goal of which the offense charged is a part or toward which it is a step.” 298 N.C. at 329 , 259 S.E. 2d at 529 . 1985In State v. Barfield, supra, the court explained the common plan or scheme exception this way: “Evidence of other offenses is admissible if it tends to show the existence of a plan or design to commit the offense charged, or to accomplish a goal of which the offense charged is a part or toward which it is a step.” 298 N.C. at 329 , 259 S.E. 2d at 529 . | 1 | 1985–1985 |
State v. McClain
green
2 sentences1985In State v. McClain the common plan or scheme exception is explained as follows: “Evidence of other crimes is admissible when it tends to establish a common plan or scheme embracing the commission of a series of crimes so related to each other that proof of one or more tends to prove the crime charged and to connect the accused with its commission.” 240 N.C. at 176 , 81 S.E. 2d at 367 . 1985In State v. McClain the common plan or scheme exception is explained as follows: “Evidence of other crimes is admissible when it tends to establish a common plan or scheme embracing the commission of a series of crimes so related to each other that proof of one or more tends to prove the crime charged and to connect the accused with its commission.” 240 N.C. at 176 , 81 S.E. 2d at 367 . | 1 | 1985–1985 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
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.