Williams v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “While a trial court need not authorize an expenditure under subdivision [(a)] for a mere “fishing expidition,” it should not withhold its authority when underlying facts reasonably suggest that further exploration may prove beneficial to the accused in the development of a defense to the charge. Considering the purpose of [§ ll-2605(a)] to provide the accused with a fair opportunity to prepare and present his case, the application of the accused’s counsel for such services must be evaluated on a standard of reasonableness. [ Williams v. United States, supra at 246, quoting United States v. Schultz, 431 F.2d 907, 911 (8th Cir. 1970).]”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Gaither v. United States

2. “Counsel for a person who is financially unable to obtain investigative, expert, or other services necessary for an adequate defense may request them in an ex parte application. Upon finding, after appropriate inquiry in an ex parte proceeding, that the services are necessary and that the person is financially unable to obtain them, the court shall authorize counsel to obtain the services.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Dobson v. United States