52 Md. App. 345 - Reed v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1982
Citation profile
12
cited by 12 later decisions
1
states following
November 2009
most recently cited
12 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Barker v. Wingo · Hall v. State · Wilson v. State · Duncan and Smith v. State · Von Lusch v. State
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“stage of the trial” at which the accused has a right to be present. Rule 4-231(c) now speaks in terms of “the proceeding,” and not of "the trial.” Thus, in the instant case, one of the State’s arguments is that, once the charges against Barnett were called for trial, the motion to suppress hearing, the jury selection, and the trial proper constituted one “proceeding.” Barnett on the other hand argues that a single, complete “proceeding” ended on July 17 and a new "proceeding” started on July 18 at which Barnett was not present so that Rule 4-231(c) does not by its terms apply. These arguments are concerned more with semantics than with substance. 3 . Rule 815(b), "Determination Whether to Accept,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Barnett v. State
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.