Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 256 ARK 321 - Smith v. State

Smith v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1974

Citation profile

4
cited by 4 later decisions
1
states following
March 1995
most recently cited

4 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on King v. Cardin

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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “Complaint is made of the . . . failure to include the name of [a witness] upon the original list of witnesses furnished to defense counsel. No bad faith is attributed to the prosecuting attorney, who did not learn of this witness until the night before the trial began. He immediately informed the defense of the identity of the new witness. . . There was no plea of surprise, and [the] testimony was merely cumulative. No prejudicial error is shown. King v. Cardin, 229 Ark. 929 , 319 S.W.2d 214 (1959). [Emphasis ours.]”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage

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.