2 Cal. 3d 894 - People v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis
1970
Citation profile
342 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 345 later decisions (3 by the Supreme Court) — most recently July 2019 · most notably Faretta v. California (1975), 6 Cal. 3d 441 - People v. Beagle (1972)
342 state decisions — followed in 12 states
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 Gideon v. Wainwright · United States v. Wade · Gilbert v. California · 2 Cal. 3d 118 - People v. Marsden · 1 Cal. 3d 122 - In Re Tahl
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 345 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“incidental to the commission of the robbery.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. People v. Laster · People v. Rocco““ ‘[T]he decision whether to permit a defendant to discharge his appointed counsel and substitute another attorney during the trial is within the discretion of the trial court, and a defendant has no absolute right to more than one appointed attorney. “A defendant’s right to a court-appointed counsel does not include the right to require the court to appoint more than one counsel, except in a situation where the record clearly shows that the first appointed counsel is not adequately representing the accused. ... ‘The right of a defendant in a criminal case to have the assistance of counsel for his defense . . . may include the right to have counsel appointed by the court . . . discharged or other counsel substituted, if it is shown . . . that failure to do so would substantially impair or deny the right . . ., but the right to such discharge or substitution is not absolute, in the sense that the court is bound to accede to its assertion without a sufficient showing . . . that the right to the assistance of counsel would be substantially impaired ... in case the request is not granted. . . .’ ” ’ ””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“defendants had no interest in forcing their victims to move just for the sake of moving; their intent was to commit robberies and rapes, and the brief movements which they compelled their victims to perform were solely to facilitate such crimes.”
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.