Payne v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1928
Citation profile
23 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 25 later decisions — most recently October 1982 · most notably Hoggard v. State (1982), Harris v. State (1964)
23 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.
Relationships
Relies on Wheeler v. United States · Adams v. State · Crosby v. State · Decker v. Tyree · Cooper v. State
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 25 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““Another well settled rule is that the question of competency is left to the sound discretion of the trial judge and in the absence of clear abuse of the judicial discretion exercised, it is not reviewable upon appeal. Yother v. State, 167 Ark. 492 , 268 S. W. 861 . In Payne v. State, 177 Ark. 413 , 6 S. W. 2d 832 , the court quoted with approval the following language of Justice Brewer, speaking for the court, in Wheeler v. United States, 159 U. S. 523 , 16 S. Ct. 93 , 40 L. Ed. 244 : £The decision of this question rests primarily with the trial judge, who sees the proposed witness, notices his manner, his apparent possession or lack of intelligence, and may resort to any examination which will tend to disclose his capacity and intelligence as well as his understanding of the obligations of an oath. As many of these matters cannot be photographed into the record, the decision of the trial judge will not be disturbed on review, unless from that which is preserved it is clear that it was erroneous.’ ””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. McCall v. State““It is, of course, the duty of the trial court to follow closely the examination of a witness about whose competency there is a serious question on account of his youth, and if, during the course of the examination, it appears that the witness does not appreciate the questions asked him and the relevancy of the answer given, because of his youth, it would be the duty of the trial court to exclude the entire testimony of the witness, although his preliminary examination apparently indicated that the witness understood the obligations of an oath”. [Emphasis added]”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Harris 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.