Houston v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1990
Citation profile
11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently July 2012
11 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 Smith v. State · Glover v. State · Alfaro v. State · Taylor v. State · Koehler 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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"[blefore appellant's trial began, the court advised him that he could either represent himself or his ... court-appointed attorney could represent him with what little preparation he had undertaken. Appellant represented himself at trial while his counsel answered his questions and advised him about the cross-examination of witnesses and final argument. ## * "k "k * * We find that the trial court did not err in allowing appellant to represent himself at trial, Appellant's repeated refusal to cooperate with counsel and failure to retain private counsel enabled him to frustrate the judicial process and avoid being brought to trial. Appellant was adequatety warned by the trial court that if he chose mot to employ private counsel, he would represent himself and would be given advisory counsel. - Because appellant did not retain private counsel, he must have elected to proceed with advisory counsel only. He was again given the chance to have his court-appointed counsel represent him at trial, but he refused. From these facts, we must assume that appellant elected to waive his right to counsel and proceed pro se. * * *# * * * The record shows that the trial court clearly presented to appellant his choices of proceeding with or without counsel and appellant chose the latter. We find that he knowingly and intelligently waived his right to counsel and must suffer any negative consequences resulting from his decision."”
3 later decisions 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.