State v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
4 federal appellate · 132 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 136 later decisions — most recently August 2019 · most notably State v. Holden (1987), State v. Zuniga (1987)
4 federal appellate · 132 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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Edwards v. Arizona · Beck v. State of Ohio · Dunaway v. New York · North Carolina v. Butler
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 136 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“"We have consistently held that counsel must be allowed wide latitude in the argument of hotly contested cases. He may argue to the jury the facts in evidence and all reasonable inferences to be drawn therefrom together with the relevant law so as to present his side of the case. Whether counsel abuses this privilege is a matter ordinarily left to the sound discretion of the trial judge, and we will not review the exercise of this discretion unless there be such gross impropriety in the argument as would be likely to influence the verdict of the jury. Even so, counsel may not employ his argument as a device to place before the jury incompetent and prejudicial matter by expressing his own knowledge, beliefs and opinions not supported by the evidence[.] It is the duty of the trial judge, upon objection, to censor remarks not warranted by the evidence... and, in cases of gross impropriety, the court may properly intervene, ex mero motu. " (Citations omitted.) State v. Williams, 314 N.C. 337, 358 , 333 S.E.2d 708, 722 (1985) (quoting State v. Covington, 290 N.C. 313, 327-28 , 226 S.E.2d 629, 640 (1976)).”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Jones · State v. Allen“the breaking and entering of a dwelling house of another in the nighttime with the intent to commit a felony therein.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“The simple fact that a person struggles to accomplish some feat, taken by itself, implies neither success nor failure. The fact that defendant 'struggled to penetrate' is far from equivocal and in no way negates a completed act. ... While penetration is best achieved when there is an erection, by no means can penetration to the degree necessary to satisfy the penetration element of rape be excluded because there is no erection.”
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.