Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 110 Wash. 2d 577 - State v. Rice

110 Wash. 2d 577 - State v. Rice’s Empirical Analysis

1988

Citation profile

148
cited by 148 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
5
states following
August 2021
most recently cited

5 federal appellate · 132 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 148 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently August 2021 · most notably 117 Wash. 2d 829 - State v. Lord (1992), 125 Wash. 2d 570 - State v. Gentry (1995)

5 federal appellate · 132 state decisions

71019881990200020102020decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Relies on Johnson v. Zerbst · Illinois v. Allen · Drope v. Missouri · Estelle v. Smith · Booth v. Maryland

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 148 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “(a) The defendant shall be present at the arraignment, at the time of the plea, at every stage of the trial including the impaneling of the jury and the return of the verdict, and at the imposition of sentence, except as otherwise provided by this rule. (b) The further progress of the trial to and including the return of the verdict shall not be prevented and the defendant shall be considered to have waived the right to be present whenever a defendant, initially present, (1) is voluntarily absent after the trial has commenced (whether or not the defendant has been informed by the court of the obligation to remain during the trial), or (2) after being warned by the court that disruptive conduct will cause the removal of the defendant from the courtroom, persists in conduct which is such as to justify exclusion from the courtroom.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[i]n criminal prosecutions the accused shall have the right. . . to have a speedy public trial.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. ““The presence of the accused [at the verdict] is not a mere form. It is of the very essence of a criminal trial not only that the accused shall be brought face to face with the witnesses against him [or her], but also with his [or her] triers. * * * And at no time in the whole course of the trial is this right more valuable than at the final step when the jury are to pronounce that decision which is to restore him [or her] to the liberty of a citizen, or to consign him [or her] to the scaffold or to a felon’s cell in the state prison.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

How this case has been treated — in progress

Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.