People v. Dennany’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 federal appellate · 18 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 28 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “To allow the uninformed to unwittingly waive their right of self-representation merely by requesting standby counsel 'is to imprison a man in his privileges and call it the Constitution' " ( People v. Dennany, 445 Mich. 412 , 456, 519 N.W.2d 128 , 147 [1994, Cavanaugh, Ch.J., concurring in part and dissenting in part], quoting Adams v. United States ex rel. McCann, 317 U.S. 269 , 280, 63 S.Ct. 236 , 87 L.Ed. 268 [1942] ; see also Faretta, 422 U.S. at 822 -823 , 95 S.Ct. 2525 ["There is something specially repugnant to justice in using rules of practice in such a manner as to debar a prisoner from defending himself, especially when the professed object of the rules so used is to provide for his defence”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. People v. Silburn

2. “We believe that the record in this case unmistakenly shows that defendant understood exactly what he was doing and chose to represent himself while fully aware of his alternatives. To permit a defendant in a criminal case to indulge in the charade of insisting on a right to act as his own attorney and then on appeal to use the very permission to defend himself in pro per as a basis for reversal of conviction and a grant of another trial is to make a mockery of the criminal justice system and the constitutional rights sought to be protected. We would not permit it.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. People v. Adkins

3. “Upon a defendant's initial request to proceed pro se, a court must determine that (1) the defendant's request is unequivocal, (2) the defendant is asserting his right knowingly, intelligently, and voluntarily through a colloquy advising the defendant of the dangers and disadvantages of self-representation, and (3) the defendant's self-representation will not disrupt, unduly inconvenience, and burden the court and the administration of the court's business.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. People v. Hill