Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 268 ARK 579 - Oliver v. State

Oliver v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1980

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
March 2011
most recently cited

6 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 6 later decisions — most recently March 2011

6 state decisions

201980199020002010decided

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 Bolden v. State · Burrows v. City of Forrest · Ex parte Burton · Ortega 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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “While a trial judge is not a mere umpire and may interrogate witnesses in an action before him, he may not act in a dual capacity as judge and advocate. The two roles are not concentric. The presentation of a litigant’s case in an adversary proceeding should be left to the initiative of counsel who has the responsibility to represent the interest of his client.”
    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.