How cited: State v. Bush · Go Syfert

State v. Bush (1986)

green · 30 citation events across 4 courts. Showing the 11 strongest citers on record (one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
Treatment trajectory · 1987 → 2026 · click a year to view the case as of then
198720062026
Quote Authority · 11th Cir. · 3 citations in this opinion
See also Barrett v. Harrington, 130 F.3d 246 , 256 n.11 (6th Cir. 1997) (“a judge acts in a judicial capacity when exercising control of the judge’s courtroom.” (citing Sheppard v. Maxwell, 384 U.S. 333 (1966))); Gregory v. Thompson, 500 F.2d 59, 64 (9th Cir. 1974) (denying absolute immunity to a judge who personally used physical force to remove an observer from the courtroom -- an act performed “normally” by a sheriff or a bailiff -- but explaining that judges have an “obl…
“the trial judge has the primary responsibility for controlling the conduct of spectators in the courtroom and the courthouse” and, if necessary, “may clear the courtroom and the courthouse of those who may be intimidating witnesses or other court personnel.”
Rule Authority · Ariz. Ct. App. · 4 citations in this opinion
See, e.g., United States v. Sherlock, 962 F.2d 1349, 1356 (9th Cir.1989); State v. Bush, 148 Ariz. 325, 330-31 , 714 P.2d 818, 823-24 (1986). 6 The Waller Test ¶ 9 In Waller, 467 U.S. 39 , 104 S.Ct. 2210 , 81 L.Ed.2d 31 , the United States Supreme Court unanimously established a four-part test for determining whether a closure of criminal proceedings is constitutional.
green State v. Atwood (1992)
Rule Authority · Ariz. · 2 citations in this opinion
Thus, exclusion of spectators is an extraordinary measure and “should be done with caution.” State v. Bush, 148 Ariz. 325, 330 , 714 P.2d 818, 823 (1986).
green State v. Webb (1990)
Rule Authority · Ariz. Ct. App. · 2 citations in this opinion
State v. Bush, 148 Ariz. 325, 328 , 714 P.2d 818, 821 (1986).
green State v. Mutuberria (2016)
Rule Authority · Ariz. Ct. App. · signal: cf.
Cf. State v. Bush, 148 Ariz. 325, 330 (1986) (noting the constitutional right to a fair trial includes a “disciplined courtroom where the search for truth and justice is unhampered by any feelings of fear, intimidation or revenge”) (citing State v. Stewart, 278 S.E.2d 627, 631 (S.C. 1982)).
Rule Authority · Ariz. Ct. App.
The exclusion of the public, therefore, “is an extraordinary measure and should be done with caution[,]” State v. Atwood, 171 Ariz. 576, 633 , 832 P.2d 593, 650 (1992) (quoting State v. Bush, 148 Ariz. 325, 330 , 714 P.2d 818, 823 (1986)) opinion modified on denial of reconsideration (July 10, 1992) disapproved on other grounds by State v. Nordstrom, 200 Ariz. 229 , 25 P.3d 717 (2001), especially when requested by a defendant and “would take from the public its right to be i…
Rule Authority · Ariz. Ct. App.
The exclusion of the public, therefore, “is an extraordinary measure and should be done with caution[,]” State v. Atwood, 171 Ariz. 576, 633 , 832 P.2d 593, 650 (1992) (quoting State v. Bush, 148 Ariz. 325, 330 , 714 P.2d 818, 823 (1986)) opinion modified on denial of reconsideration (July 10, 1992) disapproved on other grounds by State v. Nordstrom, 200 Ariz. 229 , 25 P.3d 717 (2001), especially when requested by a defendant and “would take from the public its right to be i…
green Cooley v. State (2004)
Rule Authority · Md. Ct. Spec. App.
"Judges should use their judicial authority to protect victims and witnesses from harassment, threats, intimidation, and harm.” State v. Bush, 148 Ariz. 325 , 714 P.2d 818, 823 (1986) (quoting National Institute of Justice, Statement of Recommended Judicial Practices 11 (1983)).
quoting National Institute of Justice, Statement of Recommended Judicial Practices 11 (1983)
green State v. Bible (1993)
Rule Authority · Ariz. · signal: cf.
Cf. State v. Bush, 148 Ariz. 325, 328-31 , 714 P.2d 818, 821-24 (1986) (outrageous intimidation— including assault of defendant, witness intimidation resulting in recantation, and threats against defense counsel — coupled with ineffective assistance of counsel required new trial).
outrageous intimidation— including assault of defendant, witness intimidation resulting in recantation, and threats against defense counsel — coupled with ineffective assistance of counsel required new trial
green State v. McCall (1989)
Rule Authority · Ariz.
State v. Bush, 148 Ariz. 325, 328 , 714 P.2d 818, 821 (1986).
green State v. Santanna (1987)
Rule Authority · Ariz.
Since a determination as to effectiveness of counsel must be made from the record, State v. Bush, 148 Ariz. 325, 328 , 714 P.2d 818, 821 (1986), the defendant in most cases will have difficulty establishing the level-of-performance prong from an unsupplemented record because it will seldom show why the trial attorney did or failed to do something.