Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 215 Ky. 725 - Yates v. Commonwealth

Yates v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

1926

Citation profile

8
cited by 8 later decisions
2
states following
June 1968
most recently cited

8 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 8 later decisions — most recently June 1968

8 state decisions

4019261930194019501960decided

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 Phelps v. Commonwealth · Long v. Commonwealth · Talbott v. Commonwealth · Truitt v. Commonwealth

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

  1. ““Construing the Constitution and the Code together, it has been held uniformly in misdemeanor cases that the Constitution does not make it necessary for the accused to be present and hear the witnesses testify. All that it does is to guarantee his right to be present, if he so desires. Hence, if he be afforded an opportunity to be present and fails to appear, or voluntarily absents himself after the trial has begun, he waives his right to meet the witnesses face to face, and the trial may proceed in his absence. Truitt v. Commonwealth, 177 Ky. 397 , 197 S.W. 797 . Long v. Commonwealth, 177 Ky. 391 , 197 S.W. 843 ; Talbott v. Commonwealth, 207 Ky. 749 , 270 S.W. 32 .””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. ““If the indictment be for a misdemeanor, the trial may be had in the absence of the defendant; or, if present, he may remain on bail during the trial.””
    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.