132 Ohio App. 3d 57 - State v. Watson’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
28 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 28 later decisions — most recently May 2023 · most notably 148 Ohio App. 3d 488 - State v. Vordenberge (2002), 152 Ohio App. 3d 360 - State v. Obermeyer (2003)
28 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 · Illinois v. Allen · Adams v. United States Ex Rel. McCann · Von Moltke v. Gillies · McKaskle v. Wiggins
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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The defendant must fully understand the advantages that counsel can provide and the practical effect of giving up those advantages. The defendant also should be informed of the standards with which he will be expected to comply in conducting his own defense; for example, the Rules of Criminal Procedure and the Rules of Evidence. [State v. Gibson (1943), 45 Ohio St.2d 366 , 376-77 ]; State v. Overholt (1991), 77 Ohio App.3d 111 .”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“To invoke the right to self-representation, the right to the assistance of counsel must be knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently waived. A two-part inquiry may be required. First, the court must determine the defendant is competent to waive the right to counsel if the court has reason to doubt the defendant's competence. Second, the court must decide whether the waiver is knowing and voluntary. [Godinez , supra, at 400-402 ].”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“the nature of the charges, the statutory offenses included within them, the range of allowable punishments thereunder, possible defenses to the charges and circumstances in mitigation thereof, and all other facts essential to a broad understanding of the whole matter.”
1 later decision 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.