Williams v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1975
Citation profile
137 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 140 later decisions — most recently July 2025 · most notably 685 So. 2d 773 - Amend. to Fla. Rules of Appellate Proc. (1996), 388 So. 2d 1281 - Gries Inv. Co. v. Chelton (1980)
137 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 Parissi v. Telechron, Inc. · 160 So. 2d 518 - State Ex Rel. Ervin v. Smith · 188 So. 2d 836 - Gossett v. State · State Ex Rel. Faircloth v. Cross · 223 So. 2d 740 - Jenkins v. Lyles
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 140 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[A] notice of appeal which is prematurely filed shall not be subject to dismissal. Rather, such a notice of appeal shall exist in a state of limbo until the judgment in the respective civil or criminal case is rendered. At the time of rendition, the notice of appeal shall mature and shall vest jurisdiction in the appellate court.”
19 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“conditioned the grant of supersedeas bond upon the filing of the notice of appeal”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority““ * * * Henceforth, the notice of appeal timely filed without simultaneous payment of the filing fee or the filing of an adjudication of insolvency shall act to vest jurisdiction in the respective appellate court. Consequently, our holding in City of Gainesville v. Thomas, supra, at 833 , [ 229 So.2d 833 (Fla.1969)] is modified as follows: ‘While timely filing of notice of appeal is jurisdictional, the timely deposit of the required filing fee (or adjudication of insolvency) is not. We do not mean to imply by this that the deposit of the fee (or adjudication of insolvency) is not mandatory for we are of the opinion that it is. The subsequent deposit of the fee after the running of the appeal time limit will not affect the jurisdiction of the appellate court.’ (Explanation added)””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.