Stephens v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
32 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently March 2022 · most notably State v. Fulminante (1999), Willis v. State (1998)
32 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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Doyle v. Ohio · Wainwright v. Greenfield · United States v. Fairchild · Williams v. Zahradnick
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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Appellant first argues the trial court erred in allowing the victim to remain in the courtroom during the trial. A.R.E. Rule 616 allows the victim of a crime the right to be present during a trial, notwithstanding Rule 615 which permits the exclusion of witnesses when requested by either party____ Rule 616, however, purports to leave no discretion to the trial court____ Appellant contends Rule 616 is unconstitutional, but has not demonstrated how the presence of the victim was so fundamentally or inherently unfair as to deprive him of a fair trial____ Nothing in the constitution touches on the exclusion of witnesses during criminal trials. The Sixth Amendment to the United States Constitution and Article 2, Section 10 of our own guarantee an accused a speedy and public trial and to be confronted with the witnesses against him. Otherwise neither document contains anything that might be seen as a right to limit those who may want to attend the trial. [16] Inasmuch as the rule permitting the exclusion of witnesses originated with the legislature, we can conceive of no reason why the rule cannot be modified in the same manner____”
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.