Williams v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1973
Citation profile
34 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently July 1990 · most notably Long v. State (1975), Powell v. State (1973)
34 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 Petty v. People · Haynes v. State · Culmore v. State · Payne v. State · Ramos v. State
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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““The conviction will be reversed. At most the evidence shows that: (1) even though the appellant was in the trailer house at the time the search warrant was executed, he was not found to be in personal possession of narcotics; (2) since four other persons were present on the scene, and the evidence shows ‘were also staying there,’ when the search warrant was executed, appellant was not shown to be in exclusive possession; (3) since the narcotics in question were found on the dressing table in one bedroom, and appellant was in the kitchen of the trailer, sufficient ‘close proximity’ is not shown; (4) even though ‘needle marks’ were on appellant’s arm, the witness testified that they could not determine whether they were recent; (5) even though the evidence shows that the utility bills for the trailer were in appellant’s name, no other evidence, other than the fact of appellant’s presence, was introduced to show he occupied the premises. See and compare Collini v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 487 S.W.2d 132 ; Harvey v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 487 S.W.2d 75 ; Hausman v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 480 S.W.2d 721 ; Payne v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 480 S.W.2d 732 ; Carr v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 480 S.W.2d 678 ; Ramos v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 478 S.W.2d 102 ; Haynes v. State, Tex.Cr.App., 475 S.W.2d 739 .””
2 later decisions quote this exact passage““[T]here must be additional independent facts and circumstances which affirmatively link the accused to the contraband in such a manner that it can be concluded he had knowledge of the contraband as well as control over it.””
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Bucklin v. State · Smith v. State
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.