Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 653 SO2D 1009 - Coney v. State

Coney v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1995

Citation profile

130
cited by 130 later decisions
2
states following
February 2023
most recently cited

129 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 130 later decisions — most recently February 2023 · most notably 782 So. 2d 343 - Muhammad v. State (2001), Cole v. State (1997)

129 state decisions

10201995200020102020decided

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 Spierings v. Alaska · Crawford v. Georgia · 547 So. 2d 1201 - Rhodes v. State · 594 So. 2d 292 - Fenelon v. State · 413 So. 2d 1175 - Francis 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 130 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “[t]he defendant has a right to be physically present at the immediate site where pretrial juror challenges are exercised.”
    32 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. “[The defendant] has the constitutional right to be present at the stages of his trial where fundamental fairness might be thwarted by his absence. Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.180(a)(4) recognizes the challenging of jurors as one of the essential stages of a criminal trial where a defendant's presence is mandated.”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “(a) ... In all prosecutions for crime the defendant shall be present: ..... (3) at any pretrial conference, unless waived by the defendant in writing; (4) at the beginning of the trial during the examination, challenging, impanelling, and swearing of the jury; (5) at all proceedings before the court when the jury is present; (6) when evidence is addressed to the court out of the presence of the jury for the purpose of laying the foundation for the introduction of evidence before the jury; ..... ..... (b) Defendant Absenting Self. If the defendant is present at the beginning of the trial and thereafter, during the progress of the trial or before the verdict of the jury has been returned into court, voluntarily absents himself or herself from the presence of the court without leave of court, or is removed from the presence of the court because of his or her disruptive conduct during the trial, the trial of the cause or the return of the verdict of the jury in the case shall not thereby be postponed or delayed, but the trial, the submission of the case to the jury for verdict, and the return of the verdict thereon shall proceed in all respects as though the defendant were present in court at all times. (c) Defendant May Be Tried in Absentia for Misdemeanors. Persons prosecuted for misdemeanors may, at their own request, by leave of court, be excused from attendance at any or all of the proceedings aforesaid. (d) Presence of Corporation. A corporation may appear by counsel at all”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.