Berness v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

74 state decisions

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

1. “"Our Alabama cases make it clear that the right of the defendant to be present when a felony verdict is returned cannot be waived, unless such waiver is made in the presence of the defendant, by his consent, or with his acquiescence. Consent or acquiescence cannot be presumed and must affirmatively appear from the record. Lee v. State, [ 244 Ala. 401 , 13 So.2d 590 ] [(1943)]; Wells v. State, 147 Ala. 140 , 41 So. 630 [(1906)]; Cook v. State, 60 Ala. 39 , 31 Am.Rep. 31 [(1877)]. We see no reason why a less stringent rule should be applied to the defendant's `right of presence' at other stages of his trial. "We are of the opinion that a criminal defendant in a non-capital felony case may waive his continuous presence at the trial. But that this waiver must be of an affirmative and positive nature and made by him personally, as for example where he voluntarily absents himself from the courtroom during the conduct of his trial. Our holding that such conduct constitutes an affirmative and voluntary waiver of the constitutional right, personal to the defendant, is consistent with the holding in McNutt v. State, 25 Ala.App. 129 , 142 So. 773 [(1932)], certiorari denied, 225 Ala. 282 , 142 So. 774 [(1932)]."”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Ex Parte Burton · Behel v. State

2. “It is settled that the continuous presence of the defendant from arraignment to sentence is an essential part of the process provided for the trial of the defendant and without which the court has no jurisdiction to pronounce judgment against him.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Ex Parte Burton · Lancaster v. State

3. “In Behel , supra, this court went on to hold that appellant voluntarily absented himself from the courtroom and waived his right to be present in court when the verdict was returned. At the hearing on the motion for a new trial, appellant was offered the opportunity to explain his absence from the courtroom during his trial and he told the trial judge:”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 405 So. 2d 51 - Behel v. State