365 Ark. 166 - Cluck v. State

How this case has been cited

Cited by 111 later decisions — most recently November 2025 · most notably Navarro v. State (2007), Strong v. State (2008)

111 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.

Jim Hannah, Chief Justice,

¶1concurring. I concur based

¶2on the doctrine of stare decisis. I again note my deep concern that by abandoning Ark. R. Evid. 404, and by eroding the common-law prohibition against the admission of character evidence, we are ignoring the presumption of innocence and the fundamental right to a fair trial. However, I have already made myself clear that, if we have not already arrived, we are casting aside proof beyond a reasonable doubt by allowing a criminal defendant to be convicted of a crime using evidence of a prior conviction.1 The evidence of intent in the present case was Cluck’s prior conviction for conspiracy to manufacture methamphetamine.

¶3 See Saul v. State, 365 Ark. 77, 225 S.W.3d 373 (2006) (Hannah, C.J., concurring); Swift v. State, 363 Ark. 496, 215 S.W.3d 619 (2005) (Hannah, C.J., concurring); Davidson v. State, 363 Ark. 86, 210 S.W.3d 887 (2005) (Hannah, C.J., concurring); Davis v. State, 362 Ark. 34, 207 S.W.3d 474 (2005) (Hannah, C.J., dissenting); Fells v. State, 362 Ark. 77, 207 S.W.3d 498 (2005) (Hannah, C.J., dissenting); McCoy v. State, 354 Ark. 322, 123 S.W.3d 901 (2003) (Hannah, J., concurring).