310 So. 2d 513 - State v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis
1975
Citation profile
35 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently May 2019 · most notably 631 So. 2d 427 - State v. Pierre (1994), 343 So. 2d 712 - State v. Elzie (1977)
35 state decisions
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 278 So. 2d 485 - State v. Douglas · State v. La Borde · State v. Cade · 306 So. 2d 662 - State v. Collins · State v. Heymann
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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“* * * assuming every fact to be proved that the evidence tends to prove, in order to convict, it must exclude every reasonable hypothesis of innocence.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“"Nevertheless, the trial jury's commonsense inference that the defendants aided and abetted in the robbery is not mere speculation based upon guilt by association. We find the inference to be reasonably based upon the actions of the defendants both prior and subsequent to the robbery, as indicating a scheme or plan to commit in concert a robbery if they located a store with a single attendant. If the evidence was so reasonably accepted by the trial jury, it excluded other reasonable hypotheses of innocence. "Therefore, since the inference was reasonably based upon evidence tending to exclude an innocent explanation for the defendant's actions at the time of the robbery, we are unable to find a total lack of evidence such as is required before granting a directed motion of acquittal."”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“"The motions for a new trial are without merit for the same reasons. The motions for a new trial are based on the lack of evidence to support a conviction. For appellate purposes, this does not raise a reviewable question of law unless there is a total lack of evidence to prove the crime or an essential element of it. State v. Collins, 306 So.2d 662 (La.1975); State v. Cade, 244 La. 534 , 153 So.2d 382 (1963)."”
2 later decisions 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.