Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 237 CONN 748 - State v. Williams

State v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis

1996

Citation profile

46
cited by 46 later decisions
1
states following
December 2018
most recently cited

46 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 46 later decisions — most recently December 2018 · most notably State v. Correa (1997), State v. Murray (2000)

46 state decisions

210199620002010decided

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 15 Cal. 2d 731 - People v. Kynette · State v. Hinton · In re Adam R. · State v. King · 12 Cal. 3d 290 - People v. Horn

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

  1. “require the same mental state, namely, a specific intent ... the particular intents required to [commit either offense] are not the same. For each intent, a distinct conscious objective is sought. A verdict of guilty of attempted murder requires a finding of the specific intent to cause death.... A verdict of guilty of assault in the first degree ... in contrast, requires a finding of the specific intent to cause serious physical injury.... We can perceive no logical reason to preclude, as a matter of law, the simultaneous possession of these intents by a defendant toward the same victim.... A defendant can intend both to cause the victim a serious physical injury and to kill the victim. No temporal separation is required for the intent, but obviously one is required for the result.”
    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.