Williams v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
19 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 19 later decisions — most recently May 2016
19 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 484 So. 2d 1002 - Gates v. State · 498 So. 2d 1224 - Van Buren v. State · 520 So. 2d 123 - Windham v. State · 684 So. 2d 591 - Catchings v. State · 472 So. 2d 363 - Lancaster 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 19 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a person who is implicated in the commission of the crime. That is to say, that if the evidence admits a reasonable inference that the witness may have been a co-perpetrator or the sole perpetrator the cautionary instruction should be given.”
5 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Williams v. State · Brown v. State“and reversed and remanded for a new trial. Williams , at 1181. We summed up the focus in Williams this way: What is under consideration in this case is whether, in a prosecution for deliberate design murder, where a manslaughter instruction is warranted and granted, the jury should be instructed as to how to determine the”
3 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Brown v. State · Russell v. State“[deliberation means that the accused gave] consideration to the intent to kill. There is no prescribed length of time for deliberation. A killing even though intentional, committed on impulse in the heat of passion is without deliberation and without malice aforethought.”
2 later decisions 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.