Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 777 SW2D 83 - Scarbrough v. State

Scarbrough v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1989

Citation profile

36
cited by 36 later decisions
3
states following
January 2017
most recently cited

36 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently January 2017 · most notably Allridge v. State (1991), Black v. State (1991)

36 state decisions

2001989199020002010decided

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 Faretta v. California · Bounds v. Smith · McKaskle v. Wiggins · Brown v. Wainwright · Webb 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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “In order competently and intelligently to invoke his Sixth Amendment right to represent himself, an accused “should be made aware of the dangers and disadvantages of self-representation, so that the record will establish that ‘he knows what he is doing and his choice is made with eyes open.’” Faretta v. California, 422 U.S. at 835 , 95 S.Ct. at 2541 , 45 L.Ed.2d at 582 . As we have shown ante, appellant in this cause was provided an extensive awareness of problems in the undertaking so that his decision would not be lightly made. See Martin v. State, 630 S.W.2d 952 , 954 n. 5 (Tex.Cr.App.1982). However, “a defendant need not himself have the skill and experience of a lawyer in order competently and intelligently to choose self-representation[.J” 422 U.S. at 835 , 95 S.Ct. at 2541 , 45 L.Ed.2d at 581-82 . “[N]either the defendant’s technical legal training nor his ability to conduct an adequate defense are requisites for self-representation.” Burton v. State, 634 S.W.2d 692, 694 (Tex.Cr.App.1982). While the choice must be knowingly and intelligently made, it need not be wise. Indeed, the accused must be permitted to “conduct his own defense ultimately to his own detriment,” if that is his informed decision. 422 U.S. at 834 , 95 S.Ct. at 2541 , 45 L.Ed.2d at 581 . Whether he is competent to represent himself is immaterial; the appropriate question is whether he is competent to choose the endeavor. Moreover, that its exercise may cause some inconvenience or even disruption in th”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “Although a defendant need not himself have the skill and experience of a lawyer in order competently and intelligently to choose self-representation, he should be made aware of the dangers and disadvantages of self-representation, so that the record will establish that `he knows what he is doing and his choice is made with eyes open.'”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “While clearly willing to accept aid of standby counsel, appellant thus displayed an unwavering desire to conduct his own defense, for better or worse.”
    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.