Dean v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis
1989
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 22 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently March 2016 · most notably Thomas Clyde Bowling, Jr. v. Phillip Parker, Warden (2003), Carter v. Sowders (1993)
2 federal appellate · 22 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 Faretta v. California · Caldwell v. Mississippi · Frendak v. United States · Sanborn v. Commonwealth · Treece 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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We hold that because the right to be present and to confront is personal to the accused under Section 11 of the Kentucky Constitution, and more particularly under [Ky.R.Crim.Proc.] 7.12, only the defendant can waive this right. The waiver must be sufficiently clear "as to indicate a conscious intent.” Powell v. Commonwealth, 346 S.W.2d 731 , 734 (1961).... [Alppellant’s counsel waived appellant's right to be present at the depositions of the two prosecution witnesses. There is no indication in the record that it was appellant's conscious intent to waive this right and his consequent right to cross-examination. Counsel’s waiver being ineffective, there was no waiver.... Appellant was not present; nor was he afforded the right to confront and cross-examine the witnesses called to testify against him.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Carter v. Sowders“It is the accused, not counsel, who must be `informed of the nature and cause of the accusation,' who must be `confronted with the witnesses against him,'.... The right to defend is given directly to the accused; for it is he who suffers the consequences if the defense fails.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Com. v. MG“impossible to predict with certainty what effect recognition of [Dean's] right to be present and to confront [the] witnesses during their live testimony would have had in the outcome of the case.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Com. v. MG
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.