Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 137 Vt. 253 - State v. Ahearn

State v. Ahearn’s Empirical Analysis

1979

Citation profile

79
cited by 79 later decisions
5
states following
August 2017
most recently cited

79 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 79 later decisions — most recently August 2017 · most notably State v. Streich (1995), State v. Willis (1985)

79 state decisions

35019791980199020002010decided

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 Glasser v. United States · Faretta v. California · Bounds v. Smith · Bates v. State Bar · Richardson v. Hynson, Westcott & Dunning, Inc.

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

  1. “A knowing and intelligent waiver of counsel depends on the particular facts and circumstances surrounding the case, including the background, experience, and conduct of the accused. If a defendant is ignorant of the available options necessary to protect his rights and is unaware of the nature of the charges and the range of the allowable punishment at the time of his decision to represent himself, the waiver of his rights is invalid, and is not made knowingly and intelligently.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “"A trial court is not required to issue compulsory process for anyone whom an accused may designate as a witness.... Compulsory process is only required where the witnesses to be called will offer competent and material testimony.... The burden is on the defendant to show that competency and materiality.... The trial court has wide discretion to determine which witnesses requested by an indigent defendant should be subpoenaed at government expense, and its decision will not be disturbed except in cases of clear abuse.” (Citations omitted.) 403 A.2d at 704 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “the court must consider such circumstances as whether present counsel is reasonably likely to afford a defendant effective assistance, whether the mutual confidence between the lawyer and client has been destroyed, whether the defendant has unduly delayed in seeking a new assignment, and whether the defendant is merely engaging in delaying tactics.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.