{
  "id": 3789376,
  "name": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. DAVID FRANKLIN HURT",
  "name_abbreviation": "State v. Hurt",
  "decision_date": "2006-08-17",
  "docket_number": "No. 192A04",
  "first_page": "572",
  "last_page": "572",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "360 N.C. 572"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "N.C.",
    "id": 9292,
    "name": "Supreme Court of North Carolina"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 5,
    "name_long": "North Carolina",
    "name": "N.C."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "359 N.C. 840",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "N.C.",
      "case_ids": [
        3796233
      ],
      "year": 2005,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/nc/359/0840-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "126 S. Ct. 2977",
      "category": "reporters:federal",
      "reporter": "S. Ct.",
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 2006,
      "opinion_index": 0
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 103,
    "char_count": 1016,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.732,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 5.8648112720239546e-08,
      "percentile": 0.36801238218907745
    },
    "sha256": "9ced15cd596f31c066336e2b8e4ec0f8ad5bf99457c57cf5171a429ed0c16401",
    "simhash": "1:b03ba02f8e022765",
    "word_count": 180
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T22:28:24.883894+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. DAVID FRANKLIN HURT"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "ORDER\nUpon consideration of the order of the Supreme Court of the United States vacating the judgment of this Court in North Carolina v. Speight, 126 S. Ct. 2977 (2006) and remanding that cause for further consideration in light of its decision in Washington v. Recuenco, -U.S. - , 126 S. Ct. 2977 (2006), the following order is entered:\nThe State shall have 20 days from the filing of this order to file and serve a supplemental brief with this Court, limited to the questions of whether there was error in this case pursuant to Washington v. Recuenco and, if so, whether any error can be found to be harmless beyond a reasonable doubt. State v. Hurt, 359 N.C. 840 (2005). Defendant may file its brief in response within 20 days after service of the State\u2019s brief upon him. Each side will be allowed up to 20 minutes of oral argument.\nBy Order of the Court in Conference, this 17th day of August 2006.\nTimmons-Goodson, J.\nFor the Court",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Timmons-Goodson, J."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "STATE OF NORTH CAROLINA v. DAVID FRANKLIN HURT\nFrom Caldwell County\nNo. 192A04"
  },
  "file_name": "0572-01",
  "first_page_order": 644,
  "last_page_order": 644
}