Watts v. Singletary’s Empirical Analysis
87 F.3d 1282 · 1996
Citation profile
7 federal appellate · 9 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 41 later decisions — most recently April 2021 · most notably United States v. Fernandez (2004), Williams v. Woodford (2002)
7 federal appellate · 9 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 Faretta v. California · Dusky v. United States · Pate v. Robinson · Drope v. Missouri · Medina v. California
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 41 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“there is no constitutional prohibition against the trial and conviction of a defendant who fails to pay attention in court — whether out of indifference, fear, confusion, boredom, or sleepiness — unless that defendant cannot understand the nature of the proceedings against him or adequately assist counsel in conducting a defense.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. Williams v. Woodford“The competency determination, because it looks to the capacity of a particular defendant to play a fact-specific role at trial, requires a case-by-case assessment.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrencee.g. People v. Palmer
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.