Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 300 Ark. 570 - Campbell v. State

Campbell v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1989

Citation profile

38
cited by 38 later decisions
2
states following
February 2026
most recently cited

38 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 38 later decisions — most recently February 2026 · most notably Loui v. Board of Medical Examiners (1995), Tucker v. Lake View School District No. 25 (1996)

38 state decisions

24019891990200020102020decided

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 Roe v. Wade · Smith v. Murray · Wehringer v. New Hampshire · People v. . Fabian · McKannay v. Horton

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

  1. “[W]e interpret art. 5, § 9 to mean that a public official becomes subj ect to removal when convicted by a plea of guilty or a verdict of guilty in circuit court of a crime defined by the article. Anything less, we believe, effectively nullifies the provision. We recognize the potential for harm to which this interpretation gives sufferance. However, the risk of harm to an individual must be balanced against the alternative — the loss of public confidence in those who govern which inevitably accompanies the spectacle of office holders who have been found guilty of an offense which disqualifies them for public trust, yet continue to hold the office by resorting to the endless delays to which the criminal justice system is now susceptible.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “[W]hen the case involves the public interest, or tends to become moot before litigation can run its course, or a decision might avert future litigation, we have, with some regularity, refused to permit mootness to become the determinant (citing authority).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “No person hereafter convicted of embezzlement of public money, bribery, forgery, or other infamous crime, shall be eligible to the General Assembly or capable of holding any office or trust or profit in this State.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent

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.