892 So. 2d 1100 - Maxwell v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

17 state decisions

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

1. “Depending on the answer to the preliminary Nelson inquiry, a complex, multi-faceted combined Nelson -7- and Faretta hearing could ensue, or the inquiry could end there.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. CHRISTOPHER DELANE DANIELS v. STATE OF FLORIDA · Mansfield v. State

2. “The first step in the procedure is the preliminary Nelson inquiry in which the court ascertains whether the defen dant unequivocally requests court-appointed counsel’s discharge and the court asks the reason for the request The answer to the preliminai’y inquiry determines the next steps. If a reason for the request is court-appointed counsel’s incompetence, then the court must further inquire of the defendant and his counsel to determine if there is reasonable cause to believe that court-appointed counsel is not rendering effective assistance and, if so, appoint substitute counsel. If the reasons for the request do not indicate ineffective assistance of counsel, then no further inquiry is required. If no further inquiry is required, or if after further inquiry there is no reasonable cause to believe that court-appointed counsel is not rendering effective assistance, and the defendant persists in a desire to discharge counsel, then the court must inform the defendant that he is not entitled to a court-appointed substitute counsel and that he would be exercising Ids right to represent himself.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 16 So. 3d 172 - Milkey v. State

3. “The State urges affirmance on authority of Augsberger v. State, 655 So.2d 1202, 1204-05 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995), which held that a Nelson inquiry is not required when the defendant does not indicate a desire to discharge court-appointed counsel and to receive a replacement. However, Augsberger addressed the necessity of conducting a full Nelson inquiry after the defendant’s response to the preliminary inquiry, not the necessity of the preliminary inquiry, which provides the opportunity for such desires to come to light.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. 16 So. 3d 172 - Milkey v. State