Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 64 MO 591 - State v. Kring

State v. Kring’s Empirical Analysis

1877

Citation profile

66
cited by 66 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
16
states following
January 2022
most recently cited

4 federal appellate · 1 district · 57 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 66 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2022 · most notably Deck v. Missouri (2005), Riggins v. Nevada (1992)

4 federal appellate · 1 district · 57 state decisions — followed in 16 states

1301877188018901900191019201930194019501960197019801990200020102020decided

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 People v. Harrington · Loyd v. Hannibal & St. Joseph Railroad · State v. Lane · Thomas v. County of St. Louis

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 66 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““We have no doubt of the power of the criminal court, at the commencement, or during the progress of a trial, to make such orders as may be necessary to secure a quiet and safe one, but the facts stated by the court in this ease, as shown by the record, that the prisoner had assaulted a person in court, about three months before the term at which he was tried, would hardly authorize the court to assume that, on his trial for life, he would be guilty of similar outrages. There must be some reason, based on the conduct of the prisoner, at the time of the trial, to authorize so important a right to be forfeited. Wlaen the court allows a prisoner to be brought before a jury with his hands chained in irons, and refuses, on his application, or that of his counsel, to order their removal, the jury must necessarily conceive a prejudice against the accused, as being in the opinion of the judge a dangerous man, and one not to be trusted, even under the surveillance of officers. Besides, the condition of the prisoner in shackles may, to some extent, deprive him of the free and calm use of all his faculties.””
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.