Jones v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2002
Citation profile
2 federal appellate · 66 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 70 later decisions — most recently June 2025 · most notably Standridge v. State (2004), Isom v. State (2004)
2 federal appellate · 66 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 Chapman v. State of California · United States v. Abel · Kinney v. United States · Atkinson v. State · Bragg 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 70 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Under Ark. R. Evid. 404(b), evidence of other crimes will be admitted if it has independent relevance, and its relevance is not substantially outweighed by the danger of unfair prejudice.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“While there is “always some prejudice that results from the inadvertent mention ofaprior conviction,” see Strawhacker v. State, 304 Ark. 726 , 804 S.W.2d 720 (1991), this court has upheld denials of mistrials where, by chance remarks, it was brought out that the defendant had prior arrests, and even prior convictions, where the comment was inadvertent. Cobbs v. State, 292 Ark. 188 , 728 S.W.2d 957 (1987); see also Novak v. State, 287 Ark. 271 , 698 S.W.2d 499 (1985) (where juror commented during voir dire that he knew the defendant because he had arrested him, the trial court’s denial of a mistrial did not require reversal because the evidence of guilt was overwhelming).”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Moore v. State“The test for determining sufficiency of the evidence is whether there is substantial evidence to support the verdict. On appeal, we will review the evidence in the light most favorable to the appellee and sustain the conviction if there is any substantial evidence to support the verdict. Evidence is substantial if it is of sufficient force and character to compel reasonable minds to reach a conclusion and pass beyond suspicion and conjecture. Only evidence supporting the verdict will be considered.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Hanlin 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.