Conte v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2015
Citation profile
74
cited by 74 later decisions
1
states following
December 2025
most recently cited
70 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on United States v. Marion · United States v. Lovasco · Holmes v. South Carolina · Smith v. United States · State v. Wilson
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 74 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“This court rejects the admission of inflammatory evidence where claims of relevance are tenuous and prejudice is great, and expects the trial court to carefully weigh the probative value of photographs against their prejudicial nature. See Camargo v. State, 327 Ark. 631, 637-38 , 940 S.W.2d 464, 467 (1997) (holding that we require the trial court to first consider whether such evidence, although relevant, creates a danger of unfair prejudice, and then to determine whether the danger of unfair prejudice substantially outweighs its probative value); see also Beed v. State, 271 Ark. 526 , 609 S.W.2d 898 (1980). Relevant evidence may be excluded if its probative value is substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice. Ark. R. Evid. 403. 17Evidence is admissible if it tends to shed light on any issue, to corroborate testimony, or if it is essential in proving a necessary element of a case, is useful to enable a witness to testify more effectively, or enable the jury to better1 understand testimony. Weger v. State, 315 Ark. 555 , 869 S.W.2d 688 (1994).”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. England v. State“Court's Review of Errors in Death or Life Imprisonment Cases. When the sentence is death or life imprisonment, the Court must review all errors prejudicial to the appellant in accordance with Ark. Code Ann. § 16-91-113 (a). To make that review possible, the appellant must abstract, or include in the Addendum, as appropriate, all rulings adverse to him or her made by the circuit court on all objections, motions and requests made by either party, together with such parts of the record as are needed for an understanding of each adverse ruling. The Attorney General will make certain and certify that all of those objections have been abstracted, or included in the Addendum, and will brief all points argued by the appellant and any other points that appear to involve prejudicial error.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Duck v. State“A defendant must object at the first opportunity, and he must then renew his objection each time the issue is raised; otherwise, he has waived his argument regarding that issue on appeal. Vaughn v. State , 338 Ark. 220 , 992 S.W.2d 785 (1999). To preserve an issue for appeal, a defendant must object at the first opportunity. Holt v. State , 2011 Ark. 391 , 384 S.W.3d 498 . A party who does not object to the introduction of evidence at the first opportunity waives such argument on appeal. Id.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Duck 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.