Trimble v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
48 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 48 later decisions — most recently September 2016 · most notably Oken v. State (1996), Mustafa v. State (1991)
48 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 Strickland v. Washington · Pate v. Robinson · Drope v. Missouri · Mills v. Maryland · Baskett v. United States
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 48 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(a) Hearing. — If, before or during a trial, the defendant in a criminal case appears to the court to be incompetent to stand trial or the defendant alleges incompetence to stand trial, the court shall determine, on evidence presented on the record, whether the defendant is incompetent to stand trial. (b) Court action if defendant competent. — If, after receiving evidence, the court finds that the defendant is competent to stand trial, the trial shall begin as soon as practicable or, if already begun, shall continue. (c) Reconsideration of competency. — At any time during the trial and before verdict, the court may reconsider the question of whether the defendant is incompetent to stand trial.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Roberts v. State · Thanos v. State“[T]he “test for ‘waiver’ which the Legislature contemplated was clearly the ‘intelligent and knowing’ failure to raise, not the failure of counsel or an unknowing petitioner to raise an issue.” In other words, the standard is “whether [the petitioner] was previously ‘aware of and understood the possible defense.’ ” [Curtis v. State, 284 Md.] at 140, 395 A.2d 464 , quoting Jourdan v. State, 275 Md. 495, 507 , 341 A.2d 388 (1975).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“The [instruction] issue is not ... a proper subject for review in this [post-conviction] proceeding because the issue of the instruction was not raised [previously] and was waived.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Adams
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.