Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 260 Ga. 141 - Thaxton v. State

Thaxton v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1990

Citation profile

82
cited by 82 later decisions
1
states following
May 2022
most recently cited

82 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 82 later decisions — most recently May 2022 · most notably Ledford v. State (1994), 234 Ga. App. 348 - McClarity v. State (1998)

82 state decisions

3701990200020102020decided

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 Jackson v. Virginia · Faretta v. California · Bruton v. United States · Durden v. State · Baker 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 82 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Both the federal and state constitutions guarantee a criminal defendant the right to self-representation. [Cits.] An unequivocal assertion of the right to represent oneself, made prior to trial, should be followed by a hearing to ensure that the defendant knowingly and intelligently waives the right to counsel and understands the disadvantages of self-representation. [Cits.]”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “[A] request made after the testimony of the State’s third witness [ ] cannot serve as the basis for reversal since a defendant “cannot frivolously change his mind in midstream” by asserting his right to self-representation in the middle of his trial. Preston v. State, 257 Ga. 42 (3) ( 354 SE2d 135 ) (1987).”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “[Herrington] did not make an unequivocal assertion of his right to represent himself prior to the commencement of his trial. [To the extent some of] his remarks may be construed as an expression of dissatisfaction with his attorney, they cannot be construed as an assertion, much less an unequivocal assertion, of his right to represent himself. 6”
    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.