Wells v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1906
Citation profile
23 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 23 later decisions — most recently September 1994
23 state decisions
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 Waller v. State · Cook v. State · Ned v. State · State v. Hughes · Brown v. State
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 23 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In cases of felony the prisoner must be [not is entitled to be] personally present when the jury return their verdict , and to support a conviction the record must affirmatively declare his presence. Hughes' case, [State v. Hughes] 2 Ala. 102 , 36 Am.Dec. 411 ; Eliza's case, [Eliza v. State] 39 Ala. 693 ; Waller's case, 40 Ala. [325 ] 326 . And in a case of felony it is error to allow the verdict to be received by the clerk during a recess of the court in the absence of the prisoner, even though this be done with the consent of his counsel. Waller's case, supra.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“The foregoing rule relates to the trials of misdemeanors, as well as felonies, except the defendant may waive the right to be present when the verdict is returned and other formalities connected with the return and reception thereof in misdemeanor cases.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“must be [not may be] personally present when the jury return their verdict and to support a conviction the record must affirmatively declare his presence.”
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.