State v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis
2010
Citation profile
2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
August 2018
most recently cited
2 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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"The offense with which this defendant is charged is aggravated murder as defined in ORS 163.095(2)(a)(E) * * *. The ultimate facts that make up that offense are clearly alleged in the indictment. To be guilty of aggravated murder one does not need to act `deliberately.' If one is guilty of aggravated murder but the jury does not unanimously find that the perpetrator acted deliberately, the guilty one is not sentenced to death but is yet guilty of aggravated murder. There is no requirement of pleading an indictment that requires the indictment to set forth possible penalties that the law may fix for guilt on a particular charge. "”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“"(1) Did the amendment alter the essential nature of the indictment against defendant, alter the availability to him of defenses or evidence, or add a theory, element, or crime? *** "(2) Did the amendment prejudice defendant's rights to notice of the charges against him and to protection against double jeopardy? *** "(3) Was the amendment itself sufficiently definite and certain?"”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“in Wagner, [and] reaffirmed in Johnson , [ State v. Terry, 333 Or. 163 , 37 P.3d 157 (2001), cert den, 536 U.S. 910 , 122 S.Ct. 2368 , 153 L.Ed.2d 189 (2002)], and [ State v. Moen, 309 Or. 45 , 786 P.2d 111 (1990)], that there is no requirement that facts that pertain only to sentencing be pleaded in the indictment [.]”
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.