630 So. 2d 113 - Ex Parte Ford’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 10 later decisions — most recently April 2016
8 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 Strickland v. Washington · Post v. Ohio · In re Ford v. State · 515 So. 2d 34 - Ford v. State · Ford 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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[b]ecause of the Defendant's own representation the jury could not consider the Defendant's mental condition in regard to the claim of aggravating circumstances or in relationship to mitigating circumstances.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“he is entitled to a new trial because, he says, his right to waive counsel became void when . . . his lack of competence to waive counsel became apparent by his bizarre behavior at trial”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“precluded by Rule 32.2(a)(4), A.R.Cr.P. (grounds that '[were] raised or addressed on appeal') and Rule 32.2(a)(5) (grounds that 'could have been but [were] not raised on appeal').”
1 later decision 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.