Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 352 Ark. 166 - Matthews v. State

Matthews v. State’s Empirical Analysis

2003

Citation profile

6
cited by 6 later decisions
1
states following
February 2021
most recently cited

6 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Berry v. State · Barnes v. State · Jones v. State · McGehee v. State · Weger 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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. “As part of its case-in-chief, the State sought to demonstrate the appellant’s motive and intent for the commission of the offense. The admission of evidence showing motive is a matter left to the discretion of the trial court, which will be reversed only for an abuse of that discretion. E.g., Martin v. State, 328 Ark. 420 , 944 S.W.2d 512 (1997). In Howard v. State, 348 Ark. 471 , 79 S.W.3d 273 (2002), we reiterated the long-held rule that where the purpose of evidence is to disclose a motive for killing, anything and everything that might have influenced the commission of the act may, as a rule, be shown. Id. at 494 , 79 S.W.3d at 287 .”
    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.