774 So. 2d 841 - Williams v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

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

1. “[b]ecause Williams' jury may have been misled into thinking that it could convict him based solely on Adderly's conduct, we hold that the instructions were fundamental error.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Davis v. State · 857 So. 2d 299 - Concepcion v. State

2. “Before you can find either Defendant guilty of trafficking in cocaine, the State must prove the following four elements beyond a reasonable doubt: One, that Torrance Adderly knowingly or Elress Williams knowingly possessed a certain substance; ... four, Torrance Adderly or Elress Williams knew the substance was cocaine or a mixture containing cocaine.... Before you can find the Defendant guilty of use or possession of drug paraphernalia, the State must prove the following two elements beyond a reasonable doubt: one, that Torrance Adderly or Elress Williams used or had in their possession with the intent to use drug paraphernalia.... A separate crime is charged in the [sic] each count of the information, and while they have been tried together each crime and the evidence applicable to it must be considered separately and a separate verdict returned as to each. A finding of guilty or not guilty as to one crime must not affect your verdict as to the other crimes charged.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Davis v. State · 939 So. 2d 278 - Garzon v. State

3. “A separate crime is charged against each defendant in each count of the information. The defendants have been tried together; however, the charges against each defendant and the evidence applicable to him must be considered separately. A finding of guilty or not guilty as to one or both of the defendants must not affect your verdict as to any other defendant or other crimes charged.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Dorsett v. McRay · 939 So. 2d 278 - Garzon v. State