Skip to main content

Williams v. State

Citations

  • 888 S.E.2d 60
  • 316 Ga. 304

How courts have described this case

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

  • “[B]ecause currently existing legal authority stands for the contrary position, 10 the alleged error must be considered subject to reasonable dispute and thus cannot constitute plain error.” (quotation marks omitted)
  • “[T]here exists no magic amount of time which counsel must spend in actual conference with his client, and [the appellant] does not specifically describe how additional communications with his lawyer would have enhanced his defense.” (quotation marks omitted)
  • “As to the second part of the test, an error is plain if it is clear or obvious under current law. An error cannot be plain where there is no controlling authority on point or if a defendant’s theory requires the extension of precedent.” (citation and punctuation omitted)
  • “As to the second part of the test, an error is plain if it is clear or obvious under current law. An error cannot be plain where there is no controlling authority on point or if a defendant’s theory requires the extension of precedent.” (citations and punctuation omitted)

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

14 cases in this archive cite this case.

Cites

58 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.