Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 258 Ark. 207 - Williams v. State

Williams v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1975

Citation profile

90
cited by 90 later decisions
3
states following
September 2010
most recently cited

88 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 90 later decisions — most recently September 2010 · most notably Perry v. State (1982), Isom v. State (2004)

88 state decisions

52019751980199020002010decided

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 Brinegar v. United States · Jackson v. Denno · Harris v. New York · Frisbie v. Collins · Oregon v. Hass

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

  1. “The power to exclude the testimony of a witness who has violated the rule should be rarely exercised. We have been unable to find any case in which this court has sustained the action of a trial court excluding the testimony of such a witness. While the witness is subject to punishment for contempt and the adverse party is free in argument to the jury, to raise an issue as to his credibility by reason of his conduct, the party, who is innocent of the rule’s violation, should not ordinarily be deprived of his testimony. Harris v. State, supra; Aden v. State, 237 Ark. 789 , 376 S.W.2d 277 ; Mobley v. State, 251 Ark. 448 , 473 S.W.2d 176 .”
    5 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “Possession * * *, not satisfactorily explained to a jury, is sufficient to support a verdict of guilt of both the burglary and larceny, even though there is no other evidence to show that the possessor had committed the crimes with felonious intent, either in person or by being present aiding, abetting and assisting another.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “[t]he substance of all definitions of probable cause is a reasonable ground for belief of guilt.”
    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.