Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 714 So. 2d 258 - State v. Williams

714 So. 2d 258 - State v. Williams’s Empirical Analysis

1998

Citation profile

17
cited by 17 later decisions
1
states following
May 2019
most recently cited

1 federal appellate · 14 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 17 later decisions — most recently May 2019

1 federal appellate · 14 state decisions

80199820002010decided

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 Jackson v. Virginia · Anders v. California · State v. Oliveaux · 573 So. 2d 528 - State v. Benjamin · United Biscuit Co. of America v. Federal Trade Commission

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

  1. “that state of mind which exists when the circumstances indicate that the offender actively desired the prescribed criminal consequences to follow his act or failure to act.”
    4 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “First, we note that the record does not reflect whether or not the trial judge ruled on the motion to suppress statements, which was based on the state's failure to notify defendant of any statements it intended to use at [trial]. However, the record reflects that the motion was moot because the state provided defendant with the information. Further, defendant proceeded to trial without objecting that the motion was outstanding. Thus, he waived all pending motions at the commencement of trial. State v. Price , 96-680 (La.App. 5th Cir. 2/25/97), 690 So.2d 191 , 196.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “A person who has committed a direct contempt of court may be found guilty and punished therefor by the court without any trial, after affording him an opportunity to be heard orally by way of defense or mitigation.”
    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.