Already have an account? Sign in instead.
You stay signed in for 30 days on this browser.
Continue with Google Continue with MicrosoftNo account yet? Create a free one.
We sent a six-digit code.
It expires in ten minutes, works once, and only in this browser. Five wrong tries void it. Send another code.
Your account is live and the Cloudflare checks are off for this browser.
20 Arkansas opinions name it 2 courts 1976–2026 6 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 |
|---|---|---|
Gaines v. Stategreen2 sentences2015In response, Gillean stated, “Then I’ll go ahead and resign.” Gillean left the meeting shortly thereafter and tendered his resignation that same day. i. relevance In Gaines v. State, 340 Ark. 99, 110 , 8 S.W.3d 547, 554 (2000) (internal citations omitted), our supreme court held as follows: Under the res gestae exception,, the State is entitled to introduce evidence showing all circumstances which explain the charged act, show a motive for acting, or illustrate the accused’s state of mind if other criminal offenses are brought to light. 2015In response, Gillean stated, “Then I’ll go ahead and resign.” Gillean left the meeting shortly thereafter and tendered his resignation that same day. i. relevance In Gaines v. State, 340 Ark. 99, 110 , 8 S.W.3d 547, 554 (2000) (internal citations omitted), our supreme court held as follows: Under the res gestae exception,, the State is entitled to introduce evidence showing all circumstances which explain the charged act, show a motive for acting, or illustrate the accused’s state of mind if other criminal offenses are brought to light. | 1 | 2 |
Bledsoe v. Stategreen2 sentences2011See Bledsoe v. State, 344 Ark. 86, 90-91 , 39 S.W.3d 760, 763-64 (2001) (holding evidence admissible under the res gestae rule, where separate incidents comprise one continuing criminal episode or an overall criminal transaction or are intermingled with the crime actually charged). 2011See Bledsoe v. State, 344 Ark. 86, 90-91 , 39 S.W.3d 760, 763-64 (2001) (holding evidence admissible under the res gestae rule, where separate incidents comprise one continuing criminal episode or an overall criminal transaction or are intermingled with the crime actually charged). | 1 | 1 |
Limber v. Stategreen2 sentences2007See, e.g., Limber v. State, 264 Ark. 479 , 572 S.W.2d 402 (1978). [T]he general rule is that evidence of other crimes by the accused, not charged in the indictment or information and not a part of the same transaction, is not admissible at the trial of the accused; however, evidence of other crimes is admissible under the res gestae exception to the general rule to establish the facts and circumstances surrounding the alleged commission of the offense. 2007See, e.g., Limber v. State, 264 Ark. 479 , 572 S.W.2d 402 (1978). [T]he general rule is that evidence of other crimes by the accused, not charged in the indictment or information and not a part of the same transaction, is not admissible at the trial of the accused; however, evidence of other crimes is admissible under the res gestae exception to the general rule to establish the facts and circumstances surrounding the alleged commission of the offense. | 1 | 1 |
Euton v. Stategreen2 sentences1982See also Euton v. State, 270 Ark. 121 , 603 S.W.2d 468 (Ark.App.1980). 1982See also Euton v. State, 270 Ark. 121 , 603 S.W.2d 468 (Ark.App.1980). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Arkansas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Young v. State
green
2 sentences1982This argument is clearly answered by the case of Young v. State, 269 Ark. 12 , 598 S.W.2d 74 (1980) wherein it is held that although the general rule is that evidence of other crimes by the accused, not charged in the indictment or information and not a part of the same transaction, is not admissible at the trial of the accused, evidence of other criminal activity is admissible under the res gestae exception to the general rule to establish the facts and circumstances surrounding the alleged commission of the offense. 1982This argument is clearly answered by the case of Young v. State, 269 Ark. 12 , 598 S.W.2d 74 (1980) wherein it is held that although the general rule is that evidence of other crimes by the accused, not charged in the indictment or information and not a part of the same transaction, is not admissible at the trial of the accused, evidence of other criminal activity is admissible under the res gestae exception to the general rule to establish the facts and circumstances surrounding the alleged commission of the offense. | 8 | 1982–2026 |
Haynes v. State
green
2 sentences2026Haynes v. State, 309 Ark. 583 , 832 S.W.2d 479 (1992); Young v. State, 269 Ark. 12 , 598 S.W.2d 74 (1980). 2026Haynes v. State, 309 Ark. 583 , 832 S.W.2d 479 (1992); Young v. State, 269 Ark. 12 , 598 S.W.2d 74 (1980). | 5 | 2000–2026 |
Donald Adams v. State of Arkansas
neutral
2 sentences2025Adams v. State, 2021 Ark. 34 , 617 S.W.3d 249 . 2025Adams v. State, 2021 Ark. 34 , 617 S.W.3d 249 . | 3 | 2023–2025 |
Thessing v. State
green
2 sentences2026Thessing v. State, 365 Ark. 384 , 230 S.W.3d 526 (2006). 2026Thessing v. State, 365 Ark. 384 , 230 S.W.3d 526 (2006). | 2 | 2014–2026 |
Eric Reid v. State of Arkansas
green
2 sentences2026Reid v. State, 2019 Ark. 363 , 588 S.W.3d 725 . 2021Reid v. State, 2019 Ark. 363 , 588 S.W.3d 725 . | 2 | 2021–2026 |
King v. State
green
2 sentences2023E.g., King v. State, 2019 Ark. 114 , 571 S.W.3d 476 . 2023E.g., King v. State, 2019 Ark. 114 , 571 S.W.3d 476 . | 2 | 2023–2023 |
Bryant Smith v. State of Arkansas
green
2 sentences2025Smith v. State, 2025 Ark. 26, at 12 , 708 S.W.3d 336, 346 . 2025Smith v. State, 2025 Ark. 26, at 12 , 708 S.W.3d 336, 346 . | 1 | 2025–2025 |
State v. Cossio
green
1 sentence2018Id. at 7-8, 529 S.W.3d at 624 -25 . | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Dixon v. State
green
2 sentences2014Dixon v. State, 2011 Ark. 450 , 385 S.W.3d 164 . 2014Dixon v. State, 2011 Ark. 450 , 385 S.W.3d 164 . | 1 | 2014–2014 |
Dail v. State
neutral
2 sentences1980Dail v. State, 255 Ark. 836 , 502 S.W. 2d 456 (1973);Russell & Davis v. State, 262 Ark. 447 , 559 S.W. 2d 7 (1977); and Carter v. United States, 549 F. 2d 77 (8th Cir. 1977). 1980Dail v. State, 255 Ark. 836 , 502 S.W. 2d 456 (1973);Russell & Davis v. State, 262 Ark. 447 , 559 S.W. 2d 7 (1977); and Carter v. United States, 549 F. 2d 77 (8th Cir. 1977). | 1 | 1980–1980 |
Bill Houston Carter v. United States
green
1 sentence1980Dail v. State, 255 Ark. 836 , 502 S.W. 2d 456 (1973);Russell & Davis v. State, 262 Ark. 447 , 559 S.W. 2d 7 (1977); and Carter v. United States, 549 F. 2d 77 (8th Cir. 1977). | 1 | 1980–1980 |
Russell v. State
green
2 sentences1980Dail v. State, 255 Ark. 836 , 502 S.W. 2d 456 (1973);Russell & Davis v. State, 262 Ark. 447 , 559 S.W. 2d 7 (1977); and Carter v. United States, 549 F. 2d 77 (8th Cir. 1977). 1980Dail v. State, 255 Ark. 836 , 502 S.W. 2d 456 (1973);Russell & Davis v. State, 262 Ark. 447 , 559 S.W. 2d 7 (1977); and Carter v. United States, 549 F. 2d 77 (8th Cir. 1977). | 1 | 1980–1980 |
Byler v. State
green
2 sentences1976While the result of a little fudging on the res gestae rule here may be justifiable because of the appellant’s conduct; yet, as pointed out in Byler v. State, 210 Ark. 790 , 197 S.W. 2d 748 (1946): “It may be unfortunate that the case will have to be retried, but we think it better that a single case should be retried than to approve an improper precedent for the trial of future cases.” For the reasons stated, I respectfully dissent. 1976While the result of a little fudging on the res gestae rule here may be justifiable because of the appellant’s conduct; yet, as pointed out in Byler v. State, 210 Ark. 790 , 197 S.W. 2d 748 (1946): “It may be unfortunate that the case will have to be retried, but we think it better that a single case should be retried than to approve an improper precedent for the trial of future cases.” For the reasons stated, I respectfully dissent. | 1 | 1976–1976 |
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.