44 Md. App. 515 - Johnson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

12 state decisions

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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Faretta v. California, supra, held that there is a constitutional right to self-representation. Snead v. State, 286 Md. 122 [ 406 A.2d 98 ] (1979), held that when a defendant expresses a desire to represent himself before the trial begins, the trial judge must conduct an inquiry to determine that (a) his request is made “clearly and unequivocally” and (b) he is “knowingly and intelligently” foregoing his right to counsel. Faretta and Snead , therefore, do not affect the established rule that replacement of counsel during the course of a trial is a matter of discretion left to the trial court, United States v. DiTommaso, 405 F.2d 385, 393 (C.A. 4th Cir.1968), cert. denied, 394 U.S. 934 [ 89 S.Ct. 1209 , 1210, 22 L.Ed.2d 465 ] (1969), and absent a showing of cause, such a request is properly denied. State v. Renshaw, 276 Md. 259, 270 [ 347 A.2d 219 ] (1975); Wright v. State, 32 Md.App. 60, 62 [ 359 A.2d 1 ] (1976), cert. denied, 278 Md. 740 (1976). In this case, there was no showing of prejudice and the motion was properly denied.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Brown