Arnold v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2011
Citation profile
21
cited by 21 later decisions
1
states following
April 2025
most recently cited
21 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Wolff v. McDonnell · Loving v. Commonwealth of Virginia · Heller v. Doe Ex Rel. Doe · Vitek v. Jones · United States v. Carolene Products Co.
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 21 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“We find no support for the idea that the statutes in question combine to create a liberty interest. First of all, section 16-93-303(a)(3) clearly states: “Nothing in this subsection shall require or compel any court of this state to establish first-offender procedures as provided in §§ 16-93-301-16-93-303, nor shall any defendant be availed the benefit of §§ 16-93-301-16-93-303 as a matter of right.” Where there is no right to expungement under a statute, it follows logically that the statute creates no liberty interest in having a “clean record.””
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority“statute impinges on a fundamental right or is based on a suspect criterion”
1 later decision 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.