Stiner v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1975
Citation profile
18 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently February 2018
18 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
Applies 28 U.S.C. § 1654
Relies on Faretta v. California · United States v. Dellinger · New York Central Railroad v. Board of Public Utility Commissioners · Indiana Employment Security Division v. Burney · Sandefur 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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““[T]he trial courts of [Oklahoma] should proceed with caution. Since the right to proceed without an attorney or by counsel necessarily involves conflicting interests, the trial court should clearly ascertain that a defendant knowingly, voluntarily and intelligently elects to proceed pro se, and in an appropriate case attention should be given to the following passage from [Faretta].” “ '. . . [A] State may — even over objection by the accused — appoint a “standby counsel” to aid the accused if and when the accused requests help, and to be available to represent the accused in the event that termination of the defendant’s self-representation is necessary. . . ( 422 U.S. at 834, n. 46 , 95 S.Ct. at 2541, n. 46 )”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Johnson v. State““In the trial of a criminal case where the defendant is represented by counsel, one or the other must be in charge of the defense in order to preserve orderly procedure in the court. . . . ””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Pickens v. State“there is no constitutional right to hybrid representation partially pro se and partially by counsel.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Parker 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.