Williams v. Nix’s Empirical Analysis
751 F.2d 956 · 1985
Citation profile
14 federal appellate · 6 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently November 2007 · most notably United States v. Nichols (1988), United States v. Espino (2003)
14 federal appellate · 6 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 Jackson v. Virginia · Faretta v. California · Gideon v. Wainwright · Wainwright v. Sykes · Powell v. State of Alabama Patterson
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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[the risk that] the presence of out-of-state counsel might hinder the orderly processing of the case is a sufficient countervailing state interest to justify the court's decision not to grant counsel of defendant's choice.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“We agree with the District Court that there was no prejudice because the felony-murder theory did not come as a surprise____ The omission of any express mention of felony murder from the indictment ... did not affect any of Williams’s substantial rights. His lawyers prepared a defense for both kinds of murder, and they vigorously resisted both theories at trial. The procedure was fair as a practical matter and not a violation of due process. In federal courts such a de facto amendment of an indictment might raise serious problems, but the Supreme Court has held that the Fourteenth Amendment does not require the states to use grand-jury indictments at all, even to prosecute serious crimes.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Franklin v. White“The omission of any express mention of felony murder from the indictment ... did not affect any of the [the defendant's] substantial rights.... In the federal courts such a de facto amendment of an indictment might raise serious problems, but the Supreme Court has held that the Fourteenth Amendment does not require the states to use grand-jury indictments at all, even to prosecute serious crimes.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Blair v. Armontrout
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.