State v. Wisenbaker’s Empirical Analysis
1983
Citation profile
9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 9 later decisions — most recently September 2010
9 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 Johnson v. Zerbst · Pointer v. Texas · Carnley v. Cochran · State v. Moore · State v. Jacobs
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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[i]f counsel, and not defendant, was at fault for counsel's failure to appear or to give timely notice to the trial court of a conflict in schedule, then sanctions must be taken against counsel, not the defendant. " (footnote omitted); see also Dees, 363 So.2d at 532 ("Whatever may have been the court's right to discipline counsel if the present motion for continuance was untimely or ill-founded, the client cannot be penalized, by the loss of his constitutional right to legal representation at his trial, for his lawyer's lapse arising out of a conflict in the lawyer's trial schedule.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“[i]f counsel, and not defendant, was at fault for counsel's failure to appear or to give timely notice to the trial court of a conflict in schedule, then sanctions must be taken against counsel, not the defendant.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“ploy to force the continuance and [the lawyer] may be subject to some type of sanction. However, unless defendant was a party to such a plot, he cannot be viewed as having waived his right to counsel.”
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.