Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 267 Ark. 278 - Gustafson v. State

Gustafson v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1979

Citation profile

75
cited by 75 later decisions
3
states following
October 2018
most recently cited

74 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 75 later decisions — most recently October 2018 · most notably Rhodes v. State (1982), 573 So. 2d 657 - Turner v. State (1990)

74 state decisions

52019791980199020002010decided

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 Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Massiah v. United States · United States v. White · Alford v. State · State v. Rowell

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

  1. “(b) Specific Instances of Conduct. Specific instances of the conduct of a witness, for the purpose of attacking or supporting his credibility, other than conviction of crime as provided in Rule 609, may not be proved by extrinsic evidence. They may, however, in the discretion of the court, if probative of truthfulness or untruthfulness, be inquired into on cross-examination of the witness (1) concerning his character for truthfulness or untruthfulness, or (2) concerning the character for truthfulness or untruthfulness of another witness as to which character the witness being cross-examined has testified.”
    7 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “General Rule. For the purpose of attacking the credibility of a witness, evidence that he has been convicted of a crime shall be admitted but only if the crime (1) was punishable by death or imprisonment in excess of one [1] year under the law under which he was convicted, and the court determines that the probative value of admitting this evidence outweighs its prejudicial effect to a party or a witness, or (2) involved dishonesty or false statements, regardless of the punishment.”
    3 later decisions quote this exact passage
  3. “theft, as it is defined in the Arkansas Criminal Code, involves dishonesty.”
    2 later decisions 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.