Williams v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““On this appeal, appellant again argues that the court erred at the original trial in permitting the amendment of the information. Appellant cites State v. Williams, 184 Mo. 261 , 83 S.W. 756 ; State v. Johnson, 191 Mo. 177 , 90 S.W. 89 , and State v. Green, 111 Mo. 585 , 20 S.W. 304 , all of which deal with the sufficiency of an information in a murder case. None dealt with the question of amendment of an information. After citing and quoting from these cases, appellant’s brief on this point concludes: ‘Under these authorities the original information was defective. In permitting the amendment the court denied appellant due process of law in violation of the Fourth (sic) Amendment of the Constitution of the United States.’ No proposition and no further exposition of the matter is made. A mere assertion such as that found in appellant’s brief presents no constitutional question for our consideration. “Appellant having advanced nothing on this proposition calling for further consideration of the question decided on the direct appeal, the trial court’s denial of relief on this ground is not erroneous.” 449 S.W.2d at 575, 576 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Williams v. State