Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 320 Ark. 516 - Bunn v. State

Bunn v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1995

Citation profile

33
cited by 33 later decisions
2
states following
November 2025
most recently cited

33 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 33 later decisions — most recently November 2025 · most notably Passley v. State (1996), Clem v. State (2002)

33 state decisions

1501995200020102020decided

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 Temple v. United States · Alford v. State · Sweatt v. State · Vasquez v. State · Rockett 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 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “We cannot consider the merits of Bunn’s argument, as he failed to abstract the photograph as a part of his appeal. As we have stated many times, “[t]he appellant in a felony criminal appeal has ‘the duty ... to abstract such parts of the record ... as are material to the points to be argued in the appellant’s brief.’” Wynn v. State, 316 Ark. 414 , 871 S.W.2d 593 (1994); See also Ark. Sup. Ct. R. 4-3(g). . . . Bunn did not present such a motion asking that we waive the requirements of Rule 4-2(a)(6); therefore, his failure to abstract the “mug shot” precludes our review of his argument on this point. As we have stated many times, the reason for this rule is basic - there is only one transcript, there are seven judges on this court, and it is impossible for each of the seven judges to examine the one transcript. Franklin v. State, 318 Ark. 99 , 884 S.W.2d 246 (1994); Dixon v. State, 314 Ark. 378 , 863 S.W.2d 282 (1993).”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. “One who burglarizes an office on January 1 and a home on February 1 may be charged in the same information with both offenses, since they are “of similar character.” He would be entitled to a severance under Rule 22.2(a), however, unless the offenses were part of a single scheme or plan or criminal episode. Even though roughly the same type of conduct might be argued to be involved in both burglaries, justifying joinder under Rule 21.1(b), the term “same conduct” in Rule 21.1(b) was probably intended to be read literally to refer to contemporaneous events and to permit joinder in a situation where, for example, a defendant robs three persons simultaneously.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “Whenever a map, plat, photograph, or other similar exhibit, which cannot be abstracted in words, must be examined for a clear understanding of the testimony, the appellant shall reproduce the exhibit by photography or other process and attach it to the copies of the abstract filed in the Court and served upon the opposing counsel, unless this requirement is shown to be impracticable and is waived by the Court upon motion.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.