State v. Reid’s Empirical Analysis
1976
Citation profile
105 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 105 later decisions — most recently October 2016 · most notably State v. Fulminante (1989), State v. Harding (1983)
105 state decisions — followed in 11 states
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 Chapman v. State of California · Boykin v. Alabama · Stovall v. Denno · Pointer v. Texas · California v. Green
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 105 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“But even to contemplate such a technique [binding and gagging a defendant], much less see it, arouses a feeling that no person should be tried while shackled and gagged except as a last resort. Not only is it possible that the sight of shackles and gags might have a significant effect on the jury's feelings about the defendant, but the use of this technique is itself something of an affront to the very dignity and decorum of judicial proceedings that the judge is seeking to uphold. (emphasis added).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Stewart · State v. Stewart“It was a rule at common law that a defendant being tried for a criminal offense had the right to make his appearance in court free from all shackles. Manacling a person when there is no necessity to do so, and bringing him into court in the presence of the jury could not be too strongly condemned.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Stewart · State v. Stewart“The practical effect of invoking the [material witness] statute, then, would quite likely have been the incarceration of the three witnesses. A.R.S. § 13-1843. Confinement of a witness, even for a few days, not charged with a crime, is a harsh and oppressive measure which we believe is justified only in the most extreme circumstances. We note also that under A.R.S. § 13-1843(B) and (C), a material witness can be detained for a maximum of three days, and that during those three days the witness may be “conditionally examined” on application of either party. Testimony given on conditional examination “ * * * may be admitted in evidence at the trial under the same conditions and for the same purpose as the testimony of a defendant or witness testifying at a preliminary hearing.” A.R.S. § 13-1843(B).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Cross v. State
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.