488 So. 2d 62 - Williams v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1986
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 156 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 164 later decisions — most recently June 2015 · most notably 559 So. 2d 187 - State v. Law (1989), Dowling v. Slotnik (1998)
2 federal appellate · 156 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 Chapman v. State of California · United States v. Hasting · Rushen v. Spain · 103 S. Ct. 247 - Beneficial Finance of Kansas, Inc. v. United States · Barrett v. United States
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 164 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[I]t is prejudicial error for a trial judge to respond to a request from the jury without the prosecuting attorney, the defendant and defendant's counsel being present and having the opportunity to participate in the discussion of the action to be taken on the jury's request.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“[c]ommunications outside the express notice requirements of rule 3.410 should be analyzed using harmless error principles.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“so fraught with potential prejudice that it cannot be considered harmless.”
4 later decisions 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.