Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 209 W. Va. 1 - State v. Allah Jamaal W.

209 W. Va. 1 - State v. Allah Jamaal W.’s Empirical Analysis

2000

Citation profile

25
cited by 25 later decisions
8
states following
June 2014
most recently cited

25 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on 194 W. Va. 657 - State v. Guthrie · 42 Cal. 3d 1222 - People v. Allen · United States v. Fountain · 192 W. Va. 165 - State v. Derr · James Edward Kennedy v. Harold J. Cardwell, Warden

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

  1. “In view of McMannis and other authorities, we hold as follows. The issue of whether a witness for the defendant should be physically restrained or required to wear prison attire while testifying before a jury is, in general, a matter within the sound discretion of the trial judge and will not be reversed absent a showing of an abuse of that discretion. The trial judge should not permit an incarcerated defense witness to appear at trial in the distinctive attire of a prisoner. However, the burden is upon the defendant to timely move that an incarcerated witness be permitted to testify at trial in civilian clothes. If the trial judge denies the motion, the judge must set forth on the record the reasons for denying said motion. An incarcerated defense witness should not be subjected to physical restraint while in court unless the trial judge has found such restraint reasonably necessary to prevent escape, provide safety, or maintain order in general. The burden is upon the defendant to timely move that an incarcerated defense witness be permitted to testify at trial without physical restraints. If the trial judge orders such restraint, the judge must enter into the record of the case the reasons therefor. Whenever the wearing of prison attire or physical restraint of a defense witness occurs in the presence of jurors trying the case, the judge should instruct those jurors that such attire or restraint is not to be considered in assessing the evidence and determining guilt.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “"(1) [T]he seriousness of the present charge, (2) the person's character, (3) the person's past record, (4) past escapes by the person, (5) attempted escapes by the person, (6) evidence the person is planning an escape, (7) threats of harm to others, (8) threats to cause disturbance, (9) evidence the person is bent upon self-destruction, (10) risk of mob violence, (11) risk of attempted revenge by victim’s family, (12) other offenders still at large, ...” [Citations omitted]”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “Because the record was silent as to the trial court's decision to deny the motion, we concluded that such denial was an abuse of discretion.) [1] Although the defendant was indicted in the Circuit Court of Marshall County, the matter was transferred to the Circuit Court of Cabell County upon a motion for a change of venue. [2] Mr. Lehman was stabbed in his right eye, with the knife penetrating his skull bone and brain. The cause of death was”
    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.