Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 351 Ark. 426 - Morris v. State

Morris v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2003

Citation profile

30
cited by 30 later decisions
1
states following
April 2025
most recently cited

30 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 30 later decisions — most recently April 2025 · most notably Starling v. State (2016), Morris v. State (2004)

30 state decisions

120200320102020decided

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 Jones v. East Tennessee, Virginia & Georgia Railroad · Harmon v. State · Britt v. State · Henderson v. State · Harshaw 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 30 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “(A) The person causes the death of another person under circumstances that would be murder, except that he or she causes the death under the influence of extreme emotional disturbance for which there is reasonable excuse. (B) The reasonableness of the excuse is determined from the viewpoint of a person in the actor’s situation under the circumstances as the actor believed them to be.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage
  2. “(A) A person acts negligently with respect to attendant circumstances or a result of his or her conduct when the person should be aware of a substantial and unjustifiable risk that the attendant circumstances exist or the result will occur. (B) The risk must be of such a nature and degree that the actor’s failure to perceive the risk involves a gross deviation from the standard of care that a 110reasonable person would observe in the actor’s situation considering the nature and purpose of the actor’s conduct and the circumstances known to the actor.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage
  3. “the Harshaw case with its reference to a weapon stands in marked contrast to this case where there is no proof, and not even an indication, that the occupants of [the victim’s] car had weapons. Furthermore, the only indications that “threats” were made was Morris’s self-serving testimony and [a witness’s] contradictory testimony.”
    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.