Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 302 Ark. 509 - Parker v. State

Parker v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1990

Citation profile

26
cited by 26 later decisions
1
states following
January 2015
most recently cited

26 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 26 later decisions — most recently January 2015 · most notably Dixon v. State (1992), Zinger v. State (1993)

26 state decisions

220199020002010decided

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 Parker v. State · Tosh v. State · Osborne v. State · Carson 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 26 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “In the past this court did reduce sentences. Carson v. State, 206 Ark. 80 , 173 S.W.2d 122 (1943). We later decided that such an action was wrong because it violated the separation of powers doctrine. Osborne v. State, 237 Ark. 5 , 371 S.W.2d 518 (1963). There we decided that the power to exercise clemency is vested, not in the courts, but in the chief executive. Since then we have uniformly held that the sentence is to be fixed by the jury and not by this court. If the testimony supports the conviction for the offense in question and if the sentence is within the limits set by the legislature, we are not at liberty to reduce it even though we think it unduly harsh. Id. at 7 , 371 S.W.2d at 520 .”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  2. “not less than ten (10) years nor more than forty (40) years, or life”
    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.