Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 654 So. 2d 74 - Williams v. State

654 So. 2d 74 - Williams v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1994

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
July 2011
most recently cited

4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 4 later decisions — most recently July 2011

4 state decisions

20199420002010decided

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 Laughlin v. Internal Revenue Service · Victor v. Nebraska · 344 So. 2d 1264 - Slinker v. State · 597 So. 2d 734 - Owens v. State · 607 So. 2d 361 - Chevere 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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “As further stated in Chevere v. State , 607 So.2d 361 (Ala.Cr.App. 1992): " ' "Corroborative evidence need not refer to any statement or fact testified to by the accomplice. Neither must it be strong nor sufficient of itself to support a conviction. The probative value of the evidence need only legitimately tend to connect the accused with the crime and need not directly do so. Further, corroborative evidence need not directly confirm any particular fact nor affirm each and every material fact testified to by the accomplice. Corroboration may be proven by circumstantial evidence alone.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “[F]irst, the evidence of the accomplice must be eliminated, and then, if upon examination of all other evidence, there is sufficient incriminating evidence tending to connect the defendant with the commission of the offense, there is sufficient corroboration. . . .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.