Williams v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 district · 199 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 206 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “With respect to all criminal trials, or parts of trials, taking place after the issuance of our mandate in this case, an effective waiver of the defendant’s right to be present at every stage of the trial will not always require a personal waiver by the defendant. Where the right of confrontation is not implicated, and where there is involved no other right requiring intelligent and knowing action by the defendant himself for an effective waiver, a defendant will ordinarily be bound by the action or inaction of his attorney.”

   13 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Dyson v. State · Pugh v. State

2. ““The General Assembly is presumed to be aware of this Court’s interpretation of its enactments and, if such interpretation is not legislatively overturned, to have acquiesced in that interpretation. Harden v. Mass Transit Adm., 277 Md. 399, 406 , 354 A.2d 817 (1976). This presumption is particularly strong whenever, after statutory language has been interpreted by this Court, the Legislature re-enacts the statute without changing in substance the language at issue. Harbor Island Marina v. Calvert Co., 286 Md. 303, 322-323 , 407 A.2d 738 (1979); Director v. Cash, 269 Md. 331, 345 , 305 A.2d 833 (1973) cert. denied sub nom. Vucci v. Boslow, Institution Director, 414 U.S. 1136 , 94 S.Ct. 881 , 38 L.Ed.2d 762 (1974); Macke Co. v. St. Dep’t of Assess. & T., 264 Md. 121, 132-133 , 285 A.2d 593 (1972); Stack v. Marney, 252 Md. 43, 49 , 248 A.2d 880 (1969). Under these circumstances, it is particularly inappropriate to depart from the principle of stare decisis and overrule our prior interpretation of the statute. White v. Prince George’s Co., 282 Md. 641, 657-658 , 387 A.2d 260 (1978). See also Flood v. Kuhn, 407 U.S. 258 , 92 S.Ct. 2099 , 32 L.Ed.2d 728 (1972).””

   7 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Jones v. State · Nationwide Mutual Insurance v. United States Fidelity & Guaranty Co.

3. “"The right to be present at trial is a common law right guaranteed by Article 5 of the Maryland Declaration of Rights, and is also ‘to some extent protected by the Fourteenth Amendment to the United States Constitution, and is guaranteed by Maryland Rule [4-231].’ ””

   5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Mobuary v. State · Tweedy v. State