Williams v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1996
Citation profile
11 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 11 later decisions — most recently November 2018
11 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.
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Texas 143rd Judicial District Court)
Relationships
Relies on Scharffe v. Perkins · Montgomery v. State · Clampitt v. Interinsurance Exchange · National Educational Support Systems, Inc. v. Autoskill, Inc. · Thompson v. Virginia
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(b) A person commits an offense if he: (1) intentionally or knowingly causes the death of an individual; (d) At the punishment stage of a trial, the defendant may raise the issue as to whether he caused the death under the immediate influence of sudden passion arising from an adequate cause. If the defendant proves the issue in the affirmative by the preponderance of the evidence, the offense is a felony of the second degree.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Green v. State“Hill’s testimony was not offered to show that appellant would in fact hurt [the victim] or take [her daughter] if confronted, but to reveal her state of mind at the time of the offense. Even though Hill’s testimony was admitted before appellant testified, it later served to rebut appellant’s claim that the victim was the aggressor and physically attacked him and that she threatened to take [the daughter] from him.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Anderson v. State“Such a blanket exclusion of statements made by the deceased spouse encourages automatic exclusion of this evidence without analysis of whether the statements may nevertheless be admissible pursuant to an exception to the hearsay rule.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Dorsey v. State
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.