State v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 45 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 49 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Collateral estoppel attaches only to a judgment. "There is, of course, a fundamental difference between a verdict and a judgment, the one being the jury's finding on the facts; and the other, the Judge's determination of the case upon the verdict. A verdict, before judgment has been entered thereon, has no finality, cannot be executed and cannot be pleaded in bar as res judicata or offered in evidence as collateral estoppel." (citations omitted) (emphasis in original). The force of the estoppel is the judgment itself. It is not the finding of a court but, rather, the judgment entered thereon which [precludes] the parties.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State, Dept. of Admin. v. Schallock · State v. Nunez

2. “[T]he adjudication of the court based upon the verdict of the jury, upon the plea of the defendant, or upon its own finding following a non-jury trial, that the defendant is guilty or not guilty. (emphasis added).”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Nunez · 51 Cal. 3d 335 - Lucido v. Superior Court

3. ““[T]hey were consistent with her testimony at the trial. They were offered to rebut an express and implied charge against her of improper motive — that she had consented to the sexual intercourse, later felt shame, and concocted the accusation of rape.” State v. Williams, 131 Ariz. 211 , 639 P.2d 1036, 1039 (1982).”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Janda