Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 404 So. 2d 954 - State v. Williams

404 So. 2d 954 - State v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis

1981

Citation profile

53
cited by 53 later decisions
2
states following
December 2013
most recently cited

53 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 53 later decisions — most recently December 2013 · most notably 676 So. 2d 1108 - State v. Bradford (1996), 952 So. 2d 112 - State v. Price (2006)

53 state decisions

2501981199020002010decided

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 Duncan v. State of Louisiana · Baldwin v. New York · Codispoti v. Pennsylvania · 337 So. 2d 475 - State v. McCarroll · 351 So. 2d 143 - State v. Muller

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

  1. “Although the right to a jury trial may be waived in a non-capital case, Art. I Section 17 requires that the waiver be "knowingly and intelligently" made. Therefore we must indulge every reasonable presumption against waiver of this fundamental right.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “... When consolidated, the law considers all charges as if they were originally joined in a single bill. When charges are joined the total possible punishment is the sum of the maximum possible for each....”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “... Except in capital cases, a defendant may knowingly and intelligently waive his right to trial by jury.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.