Jones v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2002
Citation profile
35 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 37 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently April 2024 · most notably Young v. Norris (2006), Romes v. State (2004)
35 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 Barker v. Wingo · United States v. MacDonald · United States v. Loud Hawk · United States v. Lucchese · Ferguson 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 37 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“In general, “An ex post facto law declares an offense to be punishable in a manner that it was not punishable at the time it was committed, and relates exclusively to criminal proceedings.” Taylor v. The Governor, 1 Ark. 21 (1837). See also Burns v. State, 303 Ark. 64 , 793 S.W.2d 779 (1990). An ex post facto law is one that makes an action done before the passing of the law, and which was innocent when done, criminal or one that aggravates a crime, or makes it greater than it was, when committed. Herman, et al v. State, 256 Ark. 840 , 512 S.W.2d 923 (1974). For ex postfacto to apply, there must be a change in the law that either criminalizes a previously innocent act or that increases the punishment received for an already criminalized act. Jones v. State, 347 Ark. 455 , 65 S.W.3d 402 (2002).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Young v. Norris“The prosecuting attorney, with the permission of the court, may at any time before the case is finally submitted to the jury dismiss the indictment as to all or a part of the defendants and the dismissal shall not bar a future prosecution for the same offense.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. CW“A dismissal or, in other words, a nolle prosequi, is not a bar to a future prosecution for the same offense.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. CW
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.