38 So. 3d 764 - Powers v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2009
Citation profile
7
cited by 7 later decisions
1
states following
September 2018
most recently cited
7 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Faretta v. California · Nunn v. Baker · 946 So. 2d 536 - Ex Parte Seymour · 607 So. 2d 369 - Hull 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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We note from the onset that because the Powerses asked the trial court to allow them to withdraw their waiver of counsel, they were obviously aware of the right to do so.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“waiver may be withdrawn and counsel appointed or retained at any stage of the proceedings.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“" '[w]ith "hybrid" representation, the defendant and counsel are both active in presenting the defense. "Standby" counsel is present to aid a defendant who is presenting his defense pro se. See Upshaw v. State , 992 So.2d 57 (Ala. Crim. App. 2007).' Powers v. State , 38 So.3d 764 , 768 n.3 (Ala. Crim. App. 2009)."”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Flagg v. State
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.