Massengale v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1995
Citation profile
36 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 36 later decisions — most recently March 2025 · most notably Stewart v. State (1998), Hill v. State (1996)
36 state decisions
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 Brown v. State · Whitson v. State · Schichtl v. Slack · Ward v. State · 472 So. 2d 694 - Boyd v. City of Montgomery
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 36 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“When a motion in limine is filed, a trial judge will usually make one of three rulings. One, he may grant the motion, and the evidence will not be admitted. Two, he may decline to rule on the motion for various reasons.... In that case it is necessary for counsel to make a specific objection during the trial. Brown v. State , 316 Ark. 724 , 875 S.W.2d 828 (1994). Third, he may deny the motion. A motion in limine which is denied preserves the issue for appeal and no further objection is required. Ward v. State , 272 Ark. 99 , 612 S.W.2d 118 (1981).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Raheem v. State
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.