Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 269 Ga. 36 - Wayne v. State

Wayne v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

57
cited by 57 later decisions
1
states following
February 2018
most recently cited

2 federal appellate · 53 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 57 later decisions — most recently February 2018 · most notably Zwiren v. Thompson (2003), Camphor v. State (2000)

2 federal appellate · 53 state decisions

400199820002010decided

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 · Von Moltke v. Gillies · Clarke v. Zant · Head 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 57 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “it is not incumbent upon a trial court to ask each of the questions set forth in Prater . " Id. at 38, 495 S.E.2d 34 . Instead, the record must show only "that the accused was made aware of the dangers of self-representation and nevertheless made a knowing and intelligent waiver.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “made with an apprehension of the nature of the charges, the statutory offenses included within them, the range of allowable punishments thereunder, possible defenses to the charges and circumstances in mitigation thereof, and all other facts essential to a broad understanding of the matter.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “Defendant failed to show any nexus whatsoever between the victim’s alleged criminal activities and his murder. He merely speculates that some unknown person may have killed the victim because he was involved with drugs [and automobile theft]. It cannot be said, therefore, that the trial court erred in prohibiting defendant from introducing the evidence in question. Compare Henderson v. State, 255 Ga. 687, 689 (1) ( 341 SE2d 439 ) (1986) with Neal v. State, 210 Ga. App. 522, 523 (2) ( 436 SE2d 574 ) (1993).”
    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.