627 So. 2d 1279 - Williams v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
12 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 12 later decisions — most recently May 2016
12 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 246 So. 2d 771 - Richardson v. State · 498 So. 2d 929 - State v. Wimberly · 536 So. 2d 202 - Tingle v. State · 509 So. 2d 261 - Wilcott v. State · 580 So. 2d 309 - Reyes 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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[[Image here]] An analysis of the information and the evidence indicates that an unnatural and lascivious act was charged and proven. The information “charges that MARK JOSEPH WILLIAMS ... did handle, fondle, or make an assault upon [K.S.], a child under 16 years of age, in a lewd, lascivious, or indecent manner, to-wit: forcing the victim to touch his penis and masturbating in the presence of the victim. ...””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“When deciding whether an instruction for a category two offense is necessary, a trial judge must `analyze the information or indictment and the proof to determine if elements of category 2 crimes may have been alleged and proved.'”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Harris 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.