Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 253 So. 2d 424 - Hooks v. State

253 So. 2d 424 - Hooks v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1971

Citation profile

29
cited by 29 later decisions
1
states following
August 2014
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 28 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently August 2014 · most notably Petition of Graham ex rel. Nine Condemned Men v. State (1979), 561 So. 2d 1130 - In Re Order on Prosecution of Cr. App. (1990)

1 federal appellate · 28 state decisions

10019711980199020002010decided

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 Anders v. California · Swenson v. Bosler · 166 So. 2d 892 - State v. Weeks · Russ v. State · Leone 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 29 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““The petitioner has no absolute right to appointed counsel in presenting his petition for certiorari in the case sub judice. The question in each proceeding of this nature before this Court should be whether, under the circumstances, the assistance of counsel is essential to accomplish a fair and thorough presentation of the petitioner’s claims. Of course, doubts should be resolved in favor of the indigent petitioner when a question of the need for counsel is presented. Each case must be decided in the light of the Fifth Amendment due process requirements. See State v. Weeks, 166 So.2d 892 (Fla.1964), where the Court held that a prisoner had no absolute right to assistance of counsel on an appeal from an adverse ruling on his motion for post-conviction relief,. although Fifth Amendment due process would require such assistance if the post-conviction motion presented an apparently substantial, meritorious claim for relief, and if the allowed hearing was potentially so complex as to suggest the need.” (p. 427)”
    4 later decisions 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.