State v. Calderon’s Empirical Analysis
2000
Citation profile
53 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 53 later decisions — most recently May 2024 · most notably State v. McCullough (2012), State v. Engelhardt (2005)
53 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 Chapman v. State of California · Brecht v. Abrahamson · Arizona v. Fulminante · Sullivan v. Louisiana · Snyder v. Commonwealth of Massachusetts
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 53 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“'implicates the basic consideration of fairness'”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. State v. Selalla · State v. Cantu“One of the most basic of the rights guaranteed by the Confrontation Clause is the accused's right to be present in the courtroom at every stage of his or her trial. Lewis v. United States, 146 U.S. 370, 373 , 13 S. Ct. 136 , 36 L. Ed. 1011 (1892). A defendant's constitutional right to be present during criminal proceedings stems from the Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses and the due process right to attend critical stages of a criminal proceeding in which the defendant is not actually confronting witnesses or evidence against him or her. See Kentucky v. Stincer, 482 U.S. 730, 745 , 107 S. Ct. 2658 , 96 L. Ed. 2d 631 (1987); United States v. Gagnon, 470 U.S. 522, 526 , 105 S. Ct. 1482 , 84 L. Ed. 2d 486 (1985). The due process right exists to the extent that a fair and just hearing 21 would be thwarted by the defendant's absence, and to that extent only. Gagnon, 470 U.S. at 526 ; Snyder v. Massachusetts, 291 U.S. 97, 107-08 , 54 S. Ct. 330 , 78 L. Ed. 674 (1934). In other words, a defendant is guaranteed the right to be present at any stage of the criminal proceeding that is critical to its outcome if the defendant's presence would contribute to the fairness of the procedure. Stincer, 482 U.S. at 745 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority““The defendant in a felony case shall be present at the arraignment, at every stage of the trial including the impaneling of the juiy and the return of the verdict, and at the imposition of sentence, except as otherwise provided by law. In prosecutions for crimes not punishable by death, the defendant’s voluntaiy absence after the trial has been commenced in such person’s presence shall not prevent continuing the trial to and including the return of the verdict.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Mann
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.