Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 863 SW2D 652 - State v. Gomez

State v. Gomez’s Empirical Analysis

1993

Citation profile

20
cited by 20 later decisions
1
states following
June 2013
most recently cited

20 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 20 later decisions — most recently June 2013

20 state decisions

100199320002010decided

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 · Faretta v. California · State v. Dulany · Feltrop v. Missouri · State v. Ervin

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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “The court, the prosecutor, and especially the criminal defendant, need ample time to prepare for trial. Allowing an untimely motion to proceed pro se would either require a continuance, which is not the intended use of the right, or would require the proceedings to proceed as scheduled which would not be fair to the parties involved, especially an unprepared defendant.”
    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.