Williams v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

11 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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““ ‘[I]t is unnecessary to remand this case to- allow [Lynch] an opportunity to prove [his] double-jeopardy claim because the facts warranting relief on that claim are not in dispute.... [0]ur holding is not based on [Lynch’s] mere allegations in [his] petition, but on the undisputed evidence present at [Lynch’s] trial, of which this Court has taken judicial notice .... Therefore, as both this Court and the Alabama Supreme Court have done numerous times in the past when the record is clear on its facts that'a Rule 32 petitioner is entitled to relief, we grant that relief, rather than waste scarce judicial resources to remand for [Lynch] to present evidence that has already been presented to a jury and that is already before this Court by way of judicial notice.’ “Williams [v. State], 104 So.3d [254] at 265-66 n. 5 [ (Ala.Crim.App.2012) ].””

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Canyon v. State · Lanier v. State

2. “"(a) A defendant may be convicted of an offense included in an offense charged. An offense is an included one if: "(1) It is established by proof of the same or fewer than all the facts required to establish the commission of the offense charged; or "(2) It consists of an attempt or solicitation to commit the offense charged or to commit a lesser included offense; or "(3) It is specifically designated by statute as a lesser degree of the offense charged; or "(4) It differs from the offense charged only in the respect that a less serious injury or risk of injury to the same person, property or public interests, or a lesser kind of culpability suffices to establish its commission."”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Harris v. State · 243 So. 3d 855 - Hutcherson v. State

3. “(1) whether the acts occur at or near the same time; (2) whether the acts occur at the same location; (3) whether there is a causal relationship between the acts, in particular whether there was an intervening event; and (4) whether there is a fresh impulse motivating some of the conduct.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Stephens · State of Tennessee v. Christopher Scottie Itzol-Deleon