675 So. 2d 94 - Coon v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
14 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 14 later decisions — most recently July 2016
14 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 Morrissey v. Brewer · Faretta v. California · Gagnon v. Scarpelli
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 14 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"`The probationer is entitled to be present at the hearing and to be represented by counsel. Counsel will be appointed to represent an indigent probationer upon request: "`(1) If the probationer makes a colorable claim that the probationer has not committed the alleged violation of the conditions or regulations of probation or the instructions issued by the probation officer; or "`(2) Even when the violation is a matter of public record or is uncontested, if there are substantial reasons that justify or mitigate the violation and that may make revocation inappropriate, and the reasons are complex or otherwise difficult to develop or present.'"”
6 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Crawford v. State · Frith v. State“"(1) The nature of the violation to which an admission is offered; “(2) The right under section (b) to be represented by counsel; "(3) The right to testify and to present witnesses and other evidence on probationer's own behalf and to cross-examine adverse witnesses under subsection (d)(1); and “(4) That, if the alleged violation involves a criminal offense for-which the probationer has not yet been tried, the probationer may still be tried for that offense, and although the probationer may not be required to testify, that any statement made by the probationer at the present proceeding may be used against the probationer at a subsequent proceeding or trial.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“the [circuit] court erred in allowing [Coon] to represent himself without first holding a hearing pursuant to Faretta v. California , 422 U.S. 806 , 95 S.Ct. 2525 , 45 L.Ed.2d 562 (1975), to determine if he had [voluntarily] relinquished his right to counsel,”
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.