State v. Williams

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding that Ohio’s gang statute did not “impermissibly establish guilt by association alone” because it “requires that the active member with guilty knowledge has specific intent or purpose to further the group’s criminal conduct before they may be prosecuted”
• holding that Ohio‘s gang statute did not ―impermissibly establish guilt by association alone‖ because it ―requires that the active member with guilty knowledge has specific intent or purpose to further the group‘s criminal conduct before they may be prosecuted‖

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

4 cases in this archive cite this case.

• State v. Bonds
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee· 2015-08-19· cited 60×
• State v. Smith
  Ohio Court of Appeals· 2017-03-03· cited 12×
• State v. Lathon
  Ohio Court of Appeals· 2024-12-17· cited 5×
• State of Tennessee v. Devonte Bonds
  Court of Criminal Appeals of Tennessee· 2016-04-07

Cites

9 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Grayned v. City of Rockford
  Supreme Court· 1972-06-26· cited 4,166×
• Gooding v. Wilson
  Supreme Court· 1972-03-23· cited 1,392×
• Coates v. City of Cincinnati
  Supreme Court· 1971-06-01· cited 1,269×
• Osborne v. Ohio
  Supreme Court· 1990-06-04· cited 897×
• People v. Gardeley
  California Supreme Court· 1996-12-23· cited 783×
• State v. Tanner
  Ohio Supreme Court· 1984-12-06· cited 153×
• United States v. Dennis Roy Choate
  Ninth Circuit· 1978-06-06· cited 90×
• Helton v. State
  Indiana Court of Appeals· 1993-12-01· cited 54×
• State v. Ochoa
  Court of Appeals of Arizona· 1997-03-04· cited 20×