Neely v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

22 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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““A direct contempt is a contempt in facie curiae. It consists of such conduct or language on the part of the contemnor as interferes with the orderly administration of justice. It may consist of an open insult, in the presence of the court, to the person of the presiding judge, or a resistance to or defiance of the power and authority of the court. ‘Misconduct in the presence of the court, which shows disrespect of its authority, or “which obstructs or has a tendency to interfere with the due administration of justice, is contempt. Thus," disorderly conduct in the courtroom, or the use of violence, or threatening or insulting language, to the court, witnesses, or counsel, is contempt.’ 9 Oye. 18 and 19. There can be no such contempt of court, unless the trial judge is conscious of it. The testimony in this record falls short of establishing such contempt. There is an entire absence of testimony that the judge knew of the drunken condition of the appellant on the day before he was tried, and there is also no testimony whatever to show that his drunkenness in any wise interfered with the conduct of the business of the court.””

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Ex Parte Redmond · 868 So. 2d 1018 - Lumumba v. State