Williams v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 1 district · 66 state decisions

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 70 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““It is the well-settled rule that, if a witness knowingly and willfully swear falsely in a material matter, his testimony should be rejected entirely, unless corroborated by the facts and circumstances of the case, or other credible evidence. Pierce v. State, 53 Ga. 365 , 369. But it is for the jury to give credit to the impeaching testimony, or the actions sought to be impeached, and to determine for itself whether to believe the one or the other; and it is for the-jury to determine whether the first swearing was willfully done, or under coercion, as put by the presiding judge in this case. The credibility of all witnesses is for the jury. The weight of all evidence is for their judgment, and this has been extended even to embrace their personal knowledge of the-character of witnesses sworn before them. Head v. Bridges, September term, 1881, (not yet reported,) Pamph. p. 56, [ 67 Ga. 227 .] In the case here, construing the charge given by request with the general charge, it amounts-to this: When a witness is satisfactorily impeached by testimony you believe, then his evidence should be rejected, unless corroborated on a material point; but whether he be impeached or not is for you to say, and though others contradict him, you may believe him and reject them; and, though he swore differently on a former trial, you may still believe him on this trial, if he swore under duress of bodily harm on the first.” Williams v. State, 69 Ga. 34 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. United States v. Hall