38 Arkansas opinions name it 2 courts 1993–2026 9 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Arkansas courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Bray v. Stategreen2 sentences2022Our supreme court has said that “the key in determining if a reversible discovery violation exists is whether the appellant was prejudiced by the prosecutor’s failure to disclose.” Bray v. State, 322 Ark. 178, 180 , 908 S.W.2d 88, 89 (1995). 2022Our supreme court has said that “the key in determining if a reversible discovery violation exists is whether the appellant was prejudiced by the prosecutor’s failure to disclose.” Bray v. State, 322 Ark. 178, 180 , 908 S.W.2d 88, 89 (1995). | 8 | 13 |
Scroggins v. Stategreen2 sentences2006As the majority correctly states, "[T]he key to determining if a reversible discovery violation exists is whether an appellant was prejudiced by the prosecutor's failure to disclose." Scroggins v. State, 312 Ark. 106, 116 , 848 S.W.2d 400, 405 (1993). 2006As the majority correctly states, "[T]he key to determining if a reversible discovery violation exists is whether an appellant was prejudiced by the prosecutor's failure to disclose." Scroggins v. State, 312 Ark. 106, 116 , 848 S.W.2d 400, 405 (1993). | 1 | 4 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Arkansas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Burton v. State
green
2 sentences2024Burton v. State, 314 Ark. 317 , 862 S.W.2d 252 (1993). 2024Burton v. State, 314 Ark. 317 , 862 S.W.2d 252 (1993). | 6 | 1994–2024 |
Hicks v. State
green
2 sentences2019Id. 2018Absent a showing of prejudice, we will not reverse." Hicks v. State , 340 Ark. 605 , 612, 12 S.W.3d 219 , 223 (2000) (internal citations omitted). *875 At issue are the Verizon records for Duck's cellular phone and Agent Shute's report generated based on the records. | 3 | 2005–2019 |
Duck v. State
green
2 sentences2021Id. 2021Id. | 2 | 2021–2021 |
Robinson v. State
neutral
2 sentences2012E.g., Robinson v. State, 317 Ark. 512 , 879 S.W.2d 419 (1994). 2012E.g., Robinson v. State, 317 Ark. 512 , 879 S.W.2d 419 (1994). | 2 | 2010–2012 |
Mosley v. State
green
2 sentences1997Mosley v. State, 323 Ark. 244 , 914 S.W.2d 731 (1996). 1997Mosley v. State, 323 Ark. 244 , 914 S.W.2d 731 (1996). | 2 | 1996–1997 |
George Gitchell v. State of Arkansas
green
1 sentence2026Gitchell v. State, 2023 Ark. | 1 | 2026–2026 |
Terry Kuykendall v. State of Arkansas
neutral
1 sentence2025Kuykendall, 2024 Ark. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Denzell Braud v. State of Arkansas
green
1 sentence2023The standard of review for imposing sanctions for discovery violations is whether there has been an abuse of discretion.25 Abuse of discretion is a high threshold that does not simply require error in the circuit court’s decision but requires that the circuit court act improvidently, thoughtlessly, or without due consideration. 26 It is within the circuit court’s discretion which sanction, if any, to employ.27 Furthermore, a reversible discovery violation will occur only if a 24 Braud v. State, 2022 Ark. 169 . 25 Barrow v. State, 2010 Ark. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Barrow v. State
neutral
2 sentences2023The standard of review for imposing sanctions for discovery violations is whether there has been an abuse of discretion.25 Abuse of discretion is a high threshold that does not simply require error in the circuit court’s decision but requires that the circuit court act improvidently, thoughtlessly, or without due consideration. 26 It is within the circuit court’s discretion which sanction, if any, to employ.27 Furthermore, a reversible discovery violation will occur only if a 24 Braud v. State, 2022 Ark. 169 . 25 Barrow v. State, 2010 Ark. 2023App. 589 , 377 S.W.3d 481 . 26 Jackson v. State, 2020 Ark. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Dallas Quincy Jackson v. State of Arkansas
green
1 sentence2023App. 589 , 377 S.W.3d 481 . 26 Jackson v. State, 2020 Ark. | 1 | 2023–2023 |
Chunestudy v. State
green
2 sentences2021This court has said that “the key in determining if a reversible discovery violation exists is whether the appellant was prejudiced by the prosecutor’s failure to disclose.” Id. at 12–13, 408 S.W.3d at 64 (citing Bray v. State, 322 Ark. 178, 180 , 908 S.W.2d 88, 89 (1995)). 2021This court has said that “the key in determining if a reversible discovery violation exists is whether the appellant was prejudiced by the prosecutor’s failure to disclose.” Id. at 12–13, 408 S.W.3d at 64 (citing Bray v. State, 322 Ark. 178, 180 , 908 S.W.2d 88, 89 (1995)). | 1 | 2021–2021 |
N.D. v. State
green
2 sentences2019Our supreme court has said that “the key in determining if a reversible discovery violation exists is whether the appellant was prejudiced by the prosecutor’s failure to disclose.” Id. at 10–11, 383 S.W.3d at 401 . 2019Our supreme court has said that “the key in determining if a reversible discovery violation exists is whether the appellant was prejudiced by the prosecutor’s failure to disclose.” Id. at 10–11, 383 S.W.3d at 401 . | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Rychtarik v. State
green
1 sentence2015Id. | 1 | 2015–2015 |
Tester v. State
green
2 sentences2012Id.; Tester v. State, 342 Ark. 549 , 30 S.W.3d 99 (2000). 2012Id.; Tester v. State, 342 Ark. 549 , 30 S.W.3d 99 (2000). | 1 | 2012–2012 |
Lacy v. State
green
2 sentences2011Lacy v. State, 2010 Ark. 388 , 377 S.W.3d 227 . 2011Lacy v. State, 2010 Ark. 388 , 377 S.W.3d 227 . | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Smith v. State
green
1 sentence2007Id. | 1 | 2007–2007 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.
Opinions by the citing court's state. A doctrine retained in one state and abandoned in another shows up here as a year span that stalls.