Talbert v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2006
Citation profile
49 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 51 later decisions — most recently March 2024 · most notably State v. McKenzie-Adams (2007), Eastin v. State (2007)
49 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 Lawrence v. Texas · Jegley v. Picado · Stone v. State · Wofford v. State · Raymond 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 51 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A law is unconstitutionally vague if it does not give a person of ordinary intelligence fair notice of what conduct is prohibited. Reinert v. State, 348 Ark. 1 , 71 S.W.3d 52 (2002). There must be ascertainable standards of guilt in a statute so that a person of average intelligence does not have to guess at its meaning. Booker v. State, 335 Ark. 316 , 984 S.W.2d 16 (1998). To challenge a statute on grounds of vagueness successfully, the party must be one of the “ ‘entrapped innocent,’ who has not received fair warning.” Reinert, 348 Ark. at 5 , 71 S.W.3d at 54 (citing Ross v. State, 347 Ark. 334, 336 , 64 S.W.3d 272, 273 (2002)). If a person’s conduct clearly falls within what is prohibited, that person cannot complain that the statute is vague. See id.”
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.