Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 135 VA 600 - Noell v. Commonwealth

Noell v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

1923

Citation profile

38
cited by 38 later decisions
7
states following
March 2016
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 32 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently March 2016 · most notably Snyder v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts (1934), 31 Ala. App. 91 - Lee v. State (1943)

2 federal appellate · 32 state decisions

801923193019401950196019701980199020002010decided

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 Hopt v. People of the Territory of Utah · State v. Slorah · Kimball & Fink v. Friend's Adm' r · 10 E.H. Smith 286 - People v. . Thorn · P. Lorillard Co. v. Clay

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 38 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[I]t has long been recognized as a settled rule of the common law, based as well upon public policy as upon the interest of the accused, that his continuous presence, from arraignment to sentence, is an essential part of the process of law provided for his trial and without which the courts have no jurisdiction to pronounce judgment upon him .... [C]onformity to the rule is essential to jurisdiction and the accused cannot waive it.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “* * * conformity to the rule is essential to jurisdiction, and the accused cannot waive it”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.