71 Ark. App. 403 - Box v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

22 state decisions

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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “In our view, this provision can be likened to Ark. Code Ann. § 5-4-310 (b)(5) (Repl. 1997), which requires that a court “shall furnish a written statement of the evidence relied upon and the reasons for revoking suspension or probation.” It has been held that this right, like any other procedural right, can be waived by the failure to object. Brandon v. State, 300 Ark. 32 , 776 S.W.2d 345 (1989); Lockett v. State, 271 Ark. 860 , 611 S.W.2d 500 (1981); Hawkins v. State, 270 Ark. 1016 , 607 S.W.2d 400 (Ark. App. 1980). We see no reason to apply a different rule here. A timely request or objection would have enabled the trial court to rule on the issue of whether the amendment applied and to correct whatever deficiency there may have been in the order. See Hawkins v. State, supra. Additionally, in Butler v. State, 324 Ark. 476 , 922 S.W.2d 685 (1996), the appellant argued that the trial court was required to make written findings of fact to support its decision to deny a transfer to juvenile court as a matter of due process, based on the decisionin Kent v. United States, 383 U.S. 541 , 86 S.Ct. 1045 , 16 L.Ed.2d 84 (1966). The supreme court declined to address the issue because there had been no objection made below, noting that even constitutional issues will not be heard for the first time on appeal. Thus, we conclude that appellant’s failure to object precludes consideration of this point on appeal.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 96 Ark. App. 160 - Williams v. State

2. “charges were part of a repetitive pattern of offenses, that past efforts at rehabilitation had proved unsuccessful, and that the pattern of offenses had become increasingly more serious”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Holmes v. State

3. “can be likened to Ark.Code Ann. § 5-4-310(b)(5) (Repl. 1997), which requires that a court”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. B.D. v. State