Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 195 CONN 1 - State v. Williams

State v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis

1985

Citation profile

42
cited by 42 later decisions
1
states following
June 2019
most recently cited

42 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 42 later decisions — most recently June 2019 · most notably Doty v. Mucci (1996), Hall v. Burns (1990)

42 state decisions

2001985199020002010decided

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 Illinois v. Allen · Estelle v. Williams · Local 408, International Brotherhood of Teamsters v. National Labor Relations Board · State v. Evans · Time, Inc. v. Bon Air Hotel, Inc.

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

  1. ““Upon the direction of the judicial authority, a defendant may be removed from the courtroom during his trial when his conduct has become so disruptive that the trial cannot proceed in an orderly manner. Reasonable means of restraint may be employed if the judicial authority finds such restraint reasonably necessary to maintain order. If the judicial authority orders such restraint, he shall enter into the record of the case the reasons therefor. Whenever physical restraint of a defendant occurs in the presence of jurors trying the case, or whenever the defendant is removed, the judicial authority shall instruct the jurors that such restraint or removal is not to be considered in assessing the evidence or in determining guilt or innocence.””
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. “[S]ound discretion has long meant a discretion that is not exercised arbitrarily or wilfully, but with regard to what is right and equitable under the circumstances and the law, and directed by the reason and conscience of the judge to a just result.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “in balancing the various interests concerned . . . .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.