2 Utah 2d 281 - State v. Penderville’s Empirical Analysis
1954
Citation profile
29 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 32 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently January 2000 · most notably Faretta v. California (1975), Martinez v. Court of Appeal of California, Fourth Appellate District (2000)
29 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 United States v. Mitchell · United States v. Gutterman · State v. Thatcher · State v. Peterson · Jackson v. Utah Rapid Transit Co.
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 32 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“considered [defendant’s] request untimely.” The court then cites to State v. Penderville, 2 Utah 2d 281 , 272 P.2d 195 (Utah 1954), stating that "its observations about a continuance are pertinent.... 'An accused may not, however, having once elected to proceed with the aid of counsel for purposes of delay or to obstruct the proceeding against him advance successfully an insincere claim of his right to defend in person.’_ The [Penderville ] Court’s comments about delay are on point for this case.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“It has been repeatedly held by this court that upon a motion to dismiss or to direct a verdict of not guilty for lack of evidence that the trial court does not consider the weight of the evidence or credibility of the witnesses, but determines the naked legal proposition of law, whether there is any substantial evidence of the guilt of the accused, and all reasonable inferences are to be taken in favor of the state. [Emphasis added.]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Maestas“[t]he right to defend in person certainly should not be denied an accused in a situation where he must either choose to use it or proceed with counsel in whom he has lost confidence.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Bakalov
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.