772 So. 2d 406 - Williams v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2000
Citation profile
5
cited by 5 later decisions
1
states following
June 2009
most recently cited
5 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on United States v. Asibor · 671 So. 2d 647 - Peterson v. State · 708 So. 2d 1327 - Duplantis v. State · 656 So. 2d 1134 - Holloman v. State · 741 So. 2d 246 - Morgan 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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“did recklessly and knowingly by force or violence, by the exhibition of a knife, take a motor vehicle from Farrah Goodman.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“... a plain, concise and definite written statement of the essential facts constituting the offense charged and shall fully notify the defendant of the nature and cause of the accusation.... An indictment shall also include the following: 1. The name of the accused; 2. The date on which the indictment was filed in court; 3. A statement that the prosecution is brought in the name and by the authority of the State of Mississippi; 4. The county and judicial district in which the indictment is brought; 5. The date and, if applicable, the time at which the offense was alleged to have been committed. Failure to state the correct date shall not render the indictment insufficient; 6. The signature of the foreman of the grand jury issuing it; and 7. The words “against the peace and dignity of the state.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage“[A]lthough the technical language of the statute for the crime of carjacking may not have been recited in the indictment, the statute was enumerated, and the facts that were stated were sufficient to notify Williams of the crime he was being charged with, therefore, allowing him the opportunity to prepare a defense. As aforementioned, the indictment stated that he was being charged with the crime of carjacking because he "did recklessly and knowingly by force or violence, by the exhibition of a knife, take a motor vehicle from Farrah Goodman." "[T]ake a motor vehicle from Farrah Goodman" is equivalent to the words "from a person's immediate actual possession."”
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.