Romes v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2004
Citation profile
64 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 64 later decisions — most recently November 2023 · most notably Coggin v. State (2004), Flowers v. State (2005)
64 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 Ramirez v. United States · Kane v. Magna Mixer Co. · Beals v. United States · Davis v. State · Misskelley 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 64 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Here, the issues ... were raised by Appellant in his written motion to suppress. However, they were not developed, either factually or legally, during the hearing on the motion. To the contrary, the record of the hearing demonstrates that Appellant abandoned these arguments.... Moreover, the record demonstrates that Appellant did not obtain clear rulings on these issues.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. Woodall v. State · Eastin v. State“In reviewing the trial court's denial of a motion to suppress evidence, we conduct a de novo review based on the totality of the circumstances, reviewing findings of historical fact for clear error and determining whether those facts give rise to reasonable suspicion or probable cause, giving due weight to inferences drawn by the trial court and proper deference to the trial court's findings. See Cummings v. State, 353 Ark. 618 , 110 S.W.3d 272 (2003); Davis v. State, 351 Ark. 406 , 94 S.W.3d 892 (2003).”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.