Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 609 SO2D 633 - Young v. State

Young v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1992

Citation profile

1
cited by 1 later decisions
1
states following
October 1993
most recently cited

1 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Faretta v. California · 581 So. 2d 162 - Lott v. State · 568 So. 2d 937 - Kleinfeld v. State · 450 So. 2d 925 - DiBartolomeo v. State · 584 So. 2d 120 - Jones 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 1 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “In understandable frustration with the defendant's refusal to accept the services of his third appointed counsel to represent defendant at his first-degree murder trial, the trial judge refused a new appointment of counsel and also refused an eleventhhour continuance of the already much delayed trial, thereby requiring defendant to represent himself with only a "stand-by" lawyer to advise him. Unfortunately, and despite the prosecution's suggestion to do so, the judge failed to conduct a Faretta hearing.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “WHETHER A FARETTA -TYPE INQUIRY IS REALLY REQUIRED WHERE THE DEFENDANT DELIBERATELY USES HIS RIGHT TO COUNSEL TO FRUSTRATE AND DELAY THE TRIAL.”
    1 later decision 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.