Williams v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

3 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 3 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “An affirmative deadly weapon finding does not affect the assessment of punishment. Instead, such a finding only affects a defendant’s parole eligibility. See TexCode Cmm.Proc.Ann. art. 42.18 (Vernon Supp. 1994). [footnote omitted] A “deadly weapon” is defined in the Texas Penal Code as “anything that in the manner of its use or intended use is capable of causing death or serious bodily injury.” Tex. Penal Code Ann. § 1.07 (a)(17)(B) (Vernon 1994). In other words, there is no requirement that the defendant intend to cause serious bodily injury with the deadly weapon. It is sufficient that the instrument, as used by the defendant or as he intended its use, was capable of causing death or serious bodily injury. [[Image here]] In theory, all felonies are susceptible to an affirmative finding of use or exhibition of a deadly weapon. Patterson, 769 S.W.2d at 940.... In Patterson, the court of criminal appeals analyzed the meaning of the words “use” and “exhibit” as those terms relate to article 42.12, § 3g. The Court determined that “used ... a deadly weapon” during the commission of the offense means that the deadly weapon was employed or utilized in order to achieve its purpose. Patterson, 769 S.W.2d at 941. Whereas “exhibited a deadly weapon” means that the weapon was consciously shown or displayed during the commission of the offense. Id. The Court went farther to explain that the term “use” constitutes any employment of a deadly weapon, even simple possession, if such possessi”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Charles v. State