Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 546 F.2d 1191 - Marcus Wayne Chenault v. Leroy N. Stynchcombe, Sheriff of Fulton County

Marcus Wayne Chenault v. Leroy N. Stynchcombe, Sheriff of Fulton County’s Empirical Analysis

546 F.2d 1191 · 1977

Citation profile

26
cited by 26 later decisions
1
cited 1 times by the Supreme Court
2
states following
December 1990
most recently cited

11 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 26 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 1990 · most notably Funchess v. Florida (1977), Lokos v. Capps (1980)

11 federal appellate · 2 state decisions

120197719801990decided

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 Gregg v. Georgia · Pate v. Robinson · Drope v. Missouri · Woodson v. North Carolina · Jurek v. Texas

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

  1. “Did the trial judge receive information which, objectively considered, should reasonably have raised a doubt about defendant's competency and alerted him to the possibility that the defendant could neither understand the proceedings or appreciate their significance, nor rationally aid his attorney in his defense. “While the Supreme Court has not articulated a general standard for the nature or quantum of evidence necessary to trigger a competency procedure, it has focused on three factors that should be considered: the existence of a history of irrational behavior, defendant’s demean- or at trial, and a prior medical opinion.””
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.