Williams v. United States’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

18 federal appellate · 6 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 27 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““A similar situation was considered by a court in the case of Williams v. United States, 332 F.2d 36 . We agree with what the court said in that case: ‘We conclude from examining the record that petitioner was present when the oral stipulation was made and that he was also present when the agreement in regard to proceedings with less than twelve jurors was put into effect. In addition we hold that the record shows that petitioner was satisfied when the court proceeded with eleven jurors.’ ” Chandler, 7 Ill. App. 3d at 955 , 289 N.E.2d at 71 .”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 359 Ill. App. 3d 639 - People v. Barrier · 7 Ill. App. 3d 949 - People v. Chandler

2. “[t]he denial of a continuance for his employed counsel was unfair [citation omitted], and this unfairness was aggravated by the court’s forcing petitioner to trial without his employed counsel, instead of giving him further reasonable time to employ a substitute. United States v. Johnston, 318 F.2d 288 (6th Cir. 1963). This procedure was “fundamental unfairness” [citation omitted]. It is of no relevance that substitute counsel has not been shown to have been incompetent or inept. United States v. Johnston, 318 F.2d 288 , 291 (6th Cir. 1963). * * *”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. Giacalone v. Lucas