Shakes v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2016
Citation profile
11 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on 149 So. 3d 672 - Bernard J. Dougherty v. State of Florida · 255 So. 2d 513 - Fowler v. State · 884 So. 2d 1010 - Burns v. State · Corbitt v. State · 880 So. 2d 1241 - Jackson v. State
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““An individual who has been adjudicated incompetent is presumed to remain' incompetent until adjudicated competent to proceed by a court.” Dougherty v. State, 149 So.3d 672, 676 (Fla. 2014) (quoting Jackson v. State, 880 So.2d 1241, 1242 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)). Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure 3.210 through 3.212 “set forth the required competency hearing procedures for determining whether a defendant is competent to proceed or has been restored to competency.” Dougherty, 149 So.3d at 677 . Rule 3.210(a) provides that “[a] person accused- of an offense or a violation of probation- or community control who is mentally incompetent to proceed at any material stage of a criminal proceeding shall not be proceeded against while incompetent.” “[W]hen the court receives notice that a defendant has regained competence, the court shall hold a hearing to determine if a defendant is competent to proceed.” Roman v. State, 163 So.3d 749, 751 (Fla. 2d DCA 2015) (citing Jackson, 880 So.2d at 1242 ); Fla. R. Crim. P. 3.212(c). The trial court may take the testimony of court-appointed experts designated under rule 3.211, or where the parties and the trial court agree, the trial court “may decide the issue of competency on the basis of the written reports alone.” Dougherty, 149 So.3d at 677 -78 (quoting Fowler v. State, 255 So.2d 513, 515 (Fla. 1971)); see Roman, 163 So.3d at 751 (“If the parties agree, the trial court can make its competency determination based solely on experts’ reports.”). ”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Moulton v. State · Losada v. State“In addition, the trial court never entered a written finding of competency, further indicating that the trial court did not make an independent competency determination.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Losada v. State“[T]he trial court did not ... make an independent determination of competency ... [and] gave no indication that it had reviewed the report submitted by the psychologist.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Losada v. State
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.