2006 UT App 327 - State v. Wareham’s Empirical Analysis
2006
Citation profile
1 district · 9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently February 2024
1 district · 9 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 Gore v. United States · State v. Dean · State v. Hamilton · State v. Pinder · State v. Robertson
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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“defendant may choose self-representation or the assistance of counsel, but is not entitled to a 'hybrid representation' where he could both enjoy the assistance of counsel and file pro se motions.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent“'When a defendant is represented by counsel, he generally has no authority to file pro se motions, and the court should not consider them.'”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissente.g. State v. Hall · State v. Finlayson“However, due to the 'special interest in administering the law governing attorney ethical rules, a trial court's discretion in situations implicating those rules is limited”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Balfour
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.