956 So. 2d 1288 - Smith v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2007
Citation profile
9 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Faretta v. California · 596 So. 2d 1008 - Waterhouse v. State · 719 So. 2d 873 - Amendment to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.111(d)(2)-(3) · 698 So. 2d 1178 - Rogers v. Singletary · 724 So. 2d 144 - Wilson 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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“To that end, our supreme court has published a model colloquy wherein the judge is to (1) inquire concerning the defendant's age, education, his ability to read and write, any mental or physical conditions, and whether anyone has threatened him concerning the decision to proceed without counsel; (2) advise the defendant that a lawyer can assist him in calling witnesses and presenting evidence, advise him regarding whether he should testify, is familiar with the rules of evidence, can ensure accurate jury instructions are given, and preserve errors for appeal; and (3) warn the defendant he will not receive special treatment and will be limited by the resources available to him while in custody.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“All in all, the judge's inquiry was limited to asking Smith about his experience with the criminal justice system, whether Smith believed he was capable of representing himself, whether he would be ready for trial on the scheduled date, and whether he would "behave like a gentleman." Smith's responses demonstrate that, while he has been involved with the criminal justice system since he was a juvenile, he had had only one jury trial, wherein he was represented by counsel and found not guilty. Nothing in the exchange between Smith and the court indicated Smith had any real understanding of what he was up against in making the decision to proceed pro se.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“Under Faretta , `[t]he test is not whether the defendant is competent to represent himself adequately, but whether he is competent to make the decision to represent himself.'”
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.