621 So. 2d 413 - Williams v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1993

Citation profile

cited by 35 later decisions

states following

February 2019

most recently cited

35 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 35 later decisions — most recently February 2019 · most notably Butler v. State (2003), Finney v. State (1995)

35 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 Rodriguez v. New York · 110 So. 2d 654 - Williams v. State · Webster v. Reproductive Health Services · Inanc v. Schreckengost · 413 So. 2d 872 - Carnavil v. Pines of Delray Ass'n

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.

“[a]lthough similarity is not a requirement for admission of other crime evidence, when the fact to be proven is, for example, identity or common plan or scheme it is generally the similarity between the charged offense and the other crime or act that gives the evidence probative value.”
8 later decisions quote this exact passage
e.g. Miller v. State · McCain v. State
“(2) OTHER CRIMES, WRONGS, OR ACTS. (a) Similar fact evidence of other crimes, wrongs, or acts is admissible when relevant to prove a material fact in issue, such as proof of motive, opportunity, intent, preparation, plan, knowledge, identity, or absence of mistake or accident, but it is inadmissible when the evidence is relevant solely to prove bad character or propensity.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passage
e.g. Miller v. State · McCain v. State
“[E]vidence of other crimes that is relevant and therefore not barred by section 90.404(2)(a), may be excluded under section 90.403 if its probative value is substantially outweighed by undue prejudice.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage
e.g. Butler v. State · 934 So. 2d 1248 - McLean 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.