State v. Stewart’s Empirical Analysis
1979
Citation profile
25 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently August 2014 · most notably State v. Wahlberg (1980), 60 Cal. 4th 335 - People v. Bryant, Smith and Wheeler (2014)
25 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 Illinois v. Allen · Patterson v. United States · Dennis v. California · Thompson v. United States · Loux v. United States
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.
“the seriousness of the present charge against the defendant; defendant's temperament and character; his age and physical attributes; his past record; past escapes or attempted escapes, and evidence of a present plan to escape; threats to harm others or cause a disturbance; self-destruction tendencies; the risk of mob violence or of attempted revenge by others; the possibility of rescue by other offenders still at large; the size and mood of the audience; the nature and physical security of the courtroom; and the adequacy and availability of alternate remedies.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Shoen“Defendants and witnesses shall not be subjected to physical restraint while in court unless the trial judge has found such restraint reasonably necessary to maintain order or security. A trial judge who orders such restraint, shall state the reasons on the record outside the presence of the jury. Whenever physical restraint of a defendant or wit ness occurs in the presence of jurors trying the case, the judge shall on request of the defendant instruct those jurors that such restraint is not to be considered in assessing the proof and determining guilt.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Lehman“Minn.R.Crim.P. 26.08, subd. 2(c) provides: Defendants and witnesses shall not be subjected to physical restraint while in court unless the trial judge has found such restraint reasonably necessary to maintain order or security. A trial judge who orders such restraint, shall state the reasons on the record outside the presence of the jury-”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Widell
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.