green
Positive treatment
Issue: presence requirementND ↗
Issue: equal protection clauseKS ↗
Issue: presence ruleWV ↗
Issue: conviction exceptionOR ↗
Quoted verbatim 2×
6.4 score
G Cite
cited 2× by 1 distinct case, last quoted 1997 ·
…one of the most basic of the rights guaranteed by the confrontation clause is the accused's right to be present in the courtroom at every stage of his trial.
⚠ not in text
Treatment trajectory · 1971 → 2026 · click a year to view as-of
1971
1998
2026
Top citers, strongest first. 9 distinct citers.
How cited ↗
discussed
Cited "but see"
Bankhead v. Mayor of River Rouge
(2×)
But see Dandridge v. Williams (1970), 397 US 471 ( 90 S Ct 1153 , 25 L Ed 2d 491 ), reh den 398 US 914 ( 90 S Ct 1684 , 26 L Ed 2d 80 ), holding that the traditional standard developed in cases concerning the regulation of business or industry applies "in the area of economics and social welfare" and that that standard would be applied in testing the validity of a regulation placing an absolute limit of $250 per month on the amount of a grant under a welfare program regardless of the size of the family and its actual needs. [18] City of Dearborn v. Wayne County Board of Supervisors (1936), 275…
discussed
Cited as authority (quoted)
State v. Sullivan
one of the most basic of the rights guaranteed by the sixth amendment confrontation clause is the accused's right to be present in the courtroom at every stage of his trial.
examined
Cited as authority (quoted)
State v. Puthoff
(2×)
one of the most basic of the rights guaranteed by the confrontation clause is the accused's right to be present in the courtroom at every stage of his trial.
discussed
Cited "see"
State v. Davis
See Illinois v. Allen, 397 U.S. 337 , 90 S.Ct. 1057 , 25 L.Ed. 2d 353 , reh'g denied, 398 U.S. 915 , 90 S.Ct. 1684 , 26 L.Ed. 2d 80 (1970); Snyder v. Massachusetts, 291 U.S. 97 , 54 S.Ct. 330 , 78 L.Ed. 674 (1934); Lewis v. United States, 146 U.S. 370 , 13 S.Ct. 136 , 36 L.Ed. 1011 (1892); State v. Smith, 29 N.J. 561 , 150 A. 2d 769 , cert. denied, 361 U.S. 861 , 80 S.Ct. 120 , 4 L.Ed. 2d 103 (1959).
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Seats
See Waller v. Florida, 397 U.S. 387 , 90 S.Ct. 1184 , 25 L.Ed.2d 435 , reh. denied, 398 U.S. 914 , 90 S.Ct. 1684 , 26 L.Ed.2d 79 (1970). 4 .
cited
Cited "see"
State v. Tanner
See Waller v. Florida, 397 U.S. 387 , 90 S.Ct. 1184 , 25 L.Ed. 2d 435 , reh denied, 398 U.S. 914 , 90 S.Ct. 1684 , 26 L.Ed. 2d 79 (1970).
discussed
Cited "see"
Anthony v. State
(2×)
also: Cited "see, e.g."
See Illinois v. Allen, 397 U.S. 337, 343-344 , 90 S.Ct. 1057, 1060-1061 , 25 L.Ed.2d 353, 359 (1970), reli. denied, 398 U.S. 715 , 90 S.Ct. 1684 , 26 L.Ed.2d 80 (1970). .
cited
Cited "see"
United States v. Cook
See Illinois v Allen, 397 US 337, 342, 343 , 25 L Ed 2d 353 , 90 S Ct 1057 , rehearing denied, 398 US 915 , 26 L Ed 2d 80 , 90 S Ct 1684 (1970), and cases cited therein.
discussed
Cited "see, e.g."
Burton v. Thornburgh
See also Dandridge v. Williams, 397 U.S. 471 , 90 S.Ct. 1153 , 25 L.Ed.2d 491 , reh. denied, 398 U.S. 914 , 90 S.Ct. 1684 , 26 L.Ed.2d 80 (1970) (class comprised of AFDC recipients receiving maximum payment did not require strict scrutiny test).
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Byrne, District Attorney of Suffolk County
v.
P. B. I. C., Inc.
v.
P. B. I. C., Inc.
Supreme Court of the United States.
May 14, 1970.
397 U.S. 1082
Garrett H. Byrne, pro se, Robert H. Quinn, Attorney General of Massachusetts, and John J. Irwin, Jr., and Lawrence P. Cohen, Assistant Attorneys General, for applicant. Harold Katz in opposition.
Published
Citer courts: South Dakota Supreme Court (2) · Supreme Court of Kansas (1)
D. C. Mass. Stay heretofore issued by the United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts staying its injunction dated May 6, 1970, is extended through May 22, 1970.