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.
19 Arkansas opinions name it 3 courts 1990–2010 0 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 |
|---|---|---|
Franklin v. Stategreen2 sentences1997The latter opinion contains the all-too-familiar and often-cited sentence, “Only if the defendant makes a prima facie case and the State fails to give a racially neutral reason for the challenge is the court required to conduct a sensitive inquiry.” Id. at 338 , 863 S.W.2d at 273 (emphasis added); see, e.g., Wooten v. State, 325 Ark. 510 , 931 S.W.2d 408 (1996); Prowell v. State, 324 Ark. 335 , 921 S.W.2d 585 (1996); Bell v. State, 324 Ark. 258 , 920 S.W.2d 821 (1996); Cooper v. State, 324 Ark. 135 , 919 S.W.2d 205 (1996); Mitchell v. State, 323 Ark. 116 , 913 S.W.2d 264 (1996); Heard v. State 1997The latter opinion contains the all-too-familiar and often-cited sentence, “Only if the defendant makes a prima facie case and the State fails to give a racially neutral reason for the challenge is the court required to conduct a sensitive inquiry.” Id. at 338 , 863 S.W.2d at 273 (emphasis added); see, e.g., Wooten v. State, 325 Ark. 510 , 931 S.W.2d 408 (1996); Prowell v. State, 324 Ark. 335 , 921 S.W.2d 585 (1996); Bell v. State, 324 Ark. 258 , 920 S.W.2d 821 (1996); Cooper v. State, 324 Ark. 135 , 919 S.W.2d 205 (1996); Mitchell v. State, 323 Ark. 116 , 913 S.W.2d 264 (1996); Heard v. State | 4 | 7 |
Wooten v. Stategreen2 sentences1997One year after the Purkett decision, our supreme court stated, “Only if the defendant makes a prima facie case and the State fails to give a racially neutral reason for the challenge is the court required to conduct a sensitive inquiry.” Wooten v. State, 325 Ark. 510, 514 , 931 S.W.2d 408, 410 (1996) (quoting Mitchell v. State, 323 Ark. 116 , 913 S.W.2d 264 (1996), cert. denied, 117 S. Ct. 979 (1997)). 1997One year after the Purkett decision, our supreme court stated, “Only if the defendant makes a prima facie case and the State fails to give a racially neutral reason for the challenge is the court required to conduct a sensitive inquiry.” Wooten v. State, 325 Ark. 510, 514 , 931 S.W.2d 408, 410 (1996) (quoting Mitchell v. State, 323 Ark. 116 , 913 S.W.2d 264 (1996), cert. denied, 117 S. Ct. 979 (1997)). | 3 | 5 |
Mitchell v. Stategreen2 sentences1997See Mitchell v. State, 295 Ark. 341 , 750 S.W.2d 936 (1988). 1997See Mitchell v. State, 295 Ark. 341 , 750 S.W.2d 936 (1988). | 3 | 3 |
Colbert v. Stategreen2 sentences1998This court later modified its interpretation of Batson with respect to the sensitive-inquiry requirement in Colbert v. State, 304 Ark. 250 , 801 S.W.2d 643 (1990). 1998This court later modified its interpretation of Batson with respect to the sensitive-inquiry requirement in Colbert v. State, 304 Ark. 250 , 801 S.W.2d 643 (1990). | 2 | 4 |
Heard v. Stategreen2 sentences1997The latter opinion contains the all-too-familiar and often-cited sentence, “Only if the defendant makes a prima facie case and the State fails to give a racially neutral reason for the challenge is the court required to conduct a sensitive inquiry.” Id. at 338 , 863 S.W.2d at 273 (emphasis added); see, e.g., Wooten v. State, 325 Ark. 510 , 931 S.W.2d 408 (1996); Prowell v. State, 324 Ark. 335 , 921 S.W.2d 585 (1996); Bell v. State, 324 Ark. 258 , 920 S.W.2d 821 (1996); Cooper v. State, 324 Ark. 135 , 919 S.W.2d 205 (1996); Mitchell v. State, 323 Ark. 116 , 913 S.W.2d 264 (1996); Heard v. State 1997The latter opinion contains the all-too-familiar and often-cited sentence, “Only if the defendant makes a prima facie case and the State fails to give a racially neutral reason for the challenge is the court required to conduct a sensitive inquiry.” Id. at 338 , 863 S.W.2d at 273 (emphasis added); see, e.g., Wooten v. State, 325 Ark. 510 , 931 S.W.2d 408 (1996); Prowell v. State, 324 Ark. 335 , 921 S.W.2d 585 (1996); Bell v. State, 324 Ark. 258 , 920 S.W.2d 821 (1996); Cooper v. State, 324 Ark. 135 , 919 S.W.2d 205 (1996); Mitchell v. State, 323 Ark. 116 , 913 S.W.2d 264 (1996); Heard v. State | 1 | 5 |
Cooper v. Stategreen2 sentences1997The latter opinion contains the all-too-familiar and often-cited sentence, “Only if the defendant makes a prima facie case and the State fails to give a racially neutral reason for the challenge is the court required to conduct a sensitive inquiry.” Id. at 338 , 863 S.W.2d at 273 (emphasis added); see, e.g., Wooten v. State, 325 Ark. 510 , 931 S.W.2d 408 (1996); Prowell v. State, 324 Ark. 335 , 921 S.W.2d 585 (1996); Bell v. State, 324 Ark. 258 , 920 S.W.2d 821 (1996); Cooper v. State, 324 Ark. 135 , 919 S.W.2d 205 (1996); Mitchell v. State, 323 Ark. 116 , 913 S.W.2d 264 (1996); Heard v. State 1997The latter opinion contains the all-too-familiar and often-cited sentence, “Only if the defendant makes a prima facie case and the State fails to give a racially neutral reason for the challenge is the court required to conduct a sensitive inquiry.” Id. at 338 , 863 S.W.2d at 273 (emphasis added); see, e.g., Wooten v. State, 325 Ark. 510 , 931 S.W.2d 408 (1996); Prowell v. State, 324 Ark. 335 , 921 S.W.2d 585 (1996); Bell v. State, 324 Ark. 258 , 920 S.W.2d 821 (1996); Cooper v. State, 324 Ark. 135 , 919 S.W.2d 205 (1996); Mitchell v. State, 323 Ark. 116 , 913 S.W.2d 264 (1996); Heard v. State | 1 | 2 |
Fischer v. United Capital Corp.green2 sentences1997Wooten v. State, 325 Ark. 510, 514 , 931 S.W.2d 408, 410 (1996), cert. denied, ___ U.S. ___, 117 S.Ct. 979 , 136 L.Ed.2d 862 (1997), quoting Prowell v. State, 324 Ark. 335, 344 , 921 S.W.2d 585, 591 (1996). 1997See Wooten v. State, 325 Ark. 510 , 931 S.W.2d 408 (1996) cert. denied, 136 L. | 1 | 2 |
Prowell v. Stategreen2 sentences1997The latter opinion contains the all-too-familiar and often-cited sentence, “Only if the defendant makes a prima facie case and the State fails to give a racially neutral reason for the challenge is the court required to conduct a sensitive inquiry.” Id. at 338 , 863 S.W.2d at 273 (emphasis added); see, e.g., Wooten v. State, 325 Ark. 510 , 931 S.W.2d 408 (1996); Prowell v. State, 324 Ark. 335 , 921 S.W.2d 585 (1996); Bell v. State, 324 Ark. 258 , 920 S.W.2d 821 (1996); Cooper v. State, 324 Ark. 135 , 919 S.W.2d 205 (1996); Mitchell v. State, 323 Ark. 116 , 913 S.W.2d 264 (1996); Heard v. State 1997The latter opinion contains the all-too-familiar and often-cited sentence, “Only if the defendant makes a prima facie case and the State fails to give a racially neutral reason for the challenge is the court required to conduct a sensitive inquiry.” Id. at 338 , 863 S.W.2d at 273 (emphasis added); see, e.g., Wooten v. State, 325 Ark. 510 , 931 S.W.2d 408 (1996); Prowell v. State, 324 Ark. 335 , 921 S.W.2d 585 (1996); Bell v. State, 324 Ark. 258 , 920 S.W.2d 821 (1996); Cooper v. State, 324 Ark. 135 , 919 S.W.2d 205 (1996); Mitchell v. State, 323 Ark. 116 , 913 S.W.2d 264 (1996); Heard v. State | 1 | 2 |
Roseby v. Stategreen2 sentences1997In a very recent Batson decision, our supreme court reiterated, “If the trial court is not satisfied with the State’s explanation, it must conduct a sensitive inquiry, and the defendant must explain how the state’s racially neutral explanation is merely a pretext.” Roseby v. State, 329 Ark. 554, 560 , 953 S.W.2d 32, 35 (emphasis added) (1997). 1997In a very recent Batson decision, our supreme court reiterated, “If the trial court is not satisfied with the State’s explanation, it must conduct a sensitive inquiry, and the defendant must explain how the state’s racially neutral explanation is merely a pretext.” Roseby v. State, 329 Ark. 554, 560 , 953 S.W.2d 32, 35 (emphasis added) (1997). | 1 | 1 |
Sonny v. Balch Motor Co.green2 sentences1997See, Sonny v. Balch Motor Co., 328 Ark. 321 , 944 S.W.2d 87 (1997); Wooten v. State, 325 Ark. 510 , 931 S.W.2d 408 (1996), cert. denied, 117 S. Ct. 979 (1997). 1997See, Sonny v. Balch Motor Co., 328 Ark. 321 , 944 S.W.2d 87 (1997); Wooten v. State, 325 Ark. 510 , 931 S.W.2d 408 (1996), cert. denied, 117 S. Ct. 979 (1997). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Arkansas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Sims v. State
green
2 sentences1997The latter opinion contains the all-too-familiar and often-cited sentence, “Only if the defendant makes a prima facie case and the State fails to give a racially neutral reason for the challenge is the court required to conduct a sensitive inquiry.” Id. at 338 , 863 S.W.2d at 273 (emphasis added); see, e.g., Wooten v. State, 325 Ark. 510 , 931 S.W.2d 408 (1996); Prowell v. State, 324 Ark. 335 , 921 S.W.2d 585 (1996); Bell v. State, 324 Ark. 258 , 920 S.W.2d 821 (1996); Cooper v. State, 324 Ark. 135 , 919 S.W.2d 205 (1996); Mitchell v. State, 323 Ark. 116 , 913 S.W.2d 264 (1996); Heard v. State 1997The latter opinion contains the all-too-familiar and often-cited sentence, “Only if the defendant makes a prima facie case and the State fails to give a racially neutral reason for the challenge is the court required to conduct a sensitive inquiry.” Id. at 338 , 863 S.W.2d at 273 (emphasis added); see, e.g., Wooten v. State, 325 Ark. 510 , 931 S.W.2d 408 (1996); Prowell v. State, 324 Ark. 335 , 921 S.W.2d 585 (1996); Bell v. State, 324 Ark. 258 , 920 S.W.2d 821 (1996); Cooper v. State, 324 Ark. 135 , 919 S.W.2d 205 (1996); Mitchell v. State, 323 Ark. 116 , 913 S.W.2d 264 (1996); Heard v. State | 5 | 1996–1998 |
Mitchell v. State
green
2 sentences1997One year after the Purkett decision, our supreme court stated, “Only if the defendant makes a prima facie case and the State fails to give a racially neutral reason for the challenge is the court required to conduct a sensitive inquiry.” Wooten v. State, 325 Ark. 510, 514 , 931 S.W.2d 408, 410 (1996) (quoting Mitchell v. State, 323 Ark. 116 , 913 S.W.2d 264 (1996), cert. denied, 117 S. Ct. 979 (1997)). 1997One year after the Purkett decision, our supreme court stated, “Only if the defendant makes a prima facie case and the State fails to give a racially neutral reason for the challenge is the court required to conduct a sensitive inquiry.” Wooten v. State, 325 Ark. 510, 514 , 931 S.W.2d 408, 410 (1996) (quoting Mitchell v. State, 323 Ark. 116 , 913 S.W.2d 264 (1996), cert. denied, 117 S. Ct. 979 (1997)). | 5 | 1996–1998 |
Rockett v. State
green
2 sentences1997The latter opinion contains the all-too-familiar and often-cited sentence, “Only if the defendant makes a prima facie case and the State fails to give a racially neutral reason for the challenge is the court required to conduct a sensitive inquiry.” Id. at 338 , 863 S.W.2d at 273 (emphasis added); see, e.g., Wooten v. State, 325 Ark. 510 , 931 S.W.2d 408 (1996); Prowell v. State, 324 Ark. 335 , 921 S.W.2d 585 (1996); Bell v. State, 324 Ark. 258 , 920 S.W.2d 821 (1996); Cooper v. State, 324 Ark. 135 , 919 S.W.2d 205 (1996); Mitchell v. State, 323 Ark. 116 , 913 S.W.2d 264 (1996); Heard v. State 1997The latter opinion contains the all-too-familiar and often-cited sentence, “Only if the defendant makes a prima facie case and the State fails to give a racially neutral reason for the challenge is the court required to conduct a sensitive inquiry.” Id. at 338 , 863 S.W.2d at 273 (emphasis added); see, e.g., Wooten v. State, 325 Ark. 510 , 931 S.W.2d 408 (1996); Prowell v. State, 324 Ark. 335 , 921 S.W.2d 585 (1996); Bell v. State, 324 Ark. 258 , 920 S.W.2d 821 (1996); Cooper v. State, 324 Ark. 135 , 919 S.W.2d 205 (1996); Mitchell v. State, 323 Ark. 116 , 913 S.W.2d 264 (1996); Heard v. State | 3 | 1995–1998 |
Brown v. Kristianson
neutral
2 sentences1997One year after the Purkett decision, our supreme court stated, “Only if the defendant makes a prima facie case and the State fails to give a racially neutral reason for the challenge is the court required to conduct a sensitive inquiry.” Wooten v. State, 325 Ark. 510, 514 , 931 S.W.2d 408, 410 (1996) (quoting Mitchell v. State, 323 Ark. 116 , 913 S.W.2d 264 (1996), cert. denied, 117 S. Ct. 979 (1997)). 1997Wooten v. State, 325 Ark. 510, 514 , 931 S.W.2d 408, 410 (1996), cert. denied, 117 S. Ct. 979 (1997), quoting Prowell v. State, 324 Ark. 335, 344 , 921 S.W.2d 585, 591 (1996). | 3 | 1997–1997 |
Gilland v. State
green
2 sentences1997The latter opinion contains the all-too-familiar and often-cited sentence, “Only if the defendant makes a prima facie case and the State fails to give a racially neutral reason for the challenge is the court required to conduct a sensitive inquiry.” Id. at 338 , 863 S.W.2d at 273 (emphasis added); see, e.g., Wooten v. State, 325 Ark. 510 , 931 S.W.2d 408 (1996); Prowell v. State, 324 Ark. 335 , 921 S.W.2d 585 (1996); Bell v. State, 324 Ark. 258 , 920 S.W.2d 821 (1996); Cooper v. State, 324 Ark. 135 , 919 S.W.2d 205 (1996); Mitchell v. State, 323 Ark. 116 , 913 S.W.2d 264 (1996); Heard v. State 1997The latter opinion contains the all-too-familiar and often-cited sentence, “Only if the defendant makes a prima facie case and the State fails to give a racially neutral reason for the challenge is the court required to conduct a sensitive inquiry.” Id. at 338 , 863 S.W.2d at 273 (emphasis added); see, e.g., Wooten v. State, 325 Ark. 510 , 931 S.W.2d 408 (1996); Prowell v. State, 324 Ark. 335 , 921 S.W.2d 585 (1996); Bell v. State, 324 Ark. 258 , 920 S.W.2d 821 (1996); Cooper v. State, 324 Ark. 135 , 919 S.W.2d 205 (1996); Mitchell v. State, 323 Ark. 116 , 913 S.W.2d 264 (1996); Heard v. State | 2 | 1997–1998 |
Washington v. Davis
green
1 sentence2010The impact of the official action — whether it `bears more heavily on one race than another,' Washington v. Davis , supra , at 242 — may provide an important starting point. | 1 | 2010–2010 |
Batson v. Kentucky
green
1 sentence1997I would reverse appellant’s conviction for second-degree murder and remand his case for retrial because the trial court failed to conduct the sensitive inquiry clearly mandated by the United States Supreme Court in Batson v. Kentucky, 476 U.S. 79 (1986). | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Hollowell v. State
neutral
1 sentence1997App. 54 , 953 S.W.2d 894 (1997); Hollowell v. State, 59 Ark. | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Bosquet v. State
green
2 sentences1997Bosquet v. State, 59 Ark. 1997The latter opinion contains the all-too-familiar and often-cited sentence, “Only if the defendant makes a prima facie case and the State fails to give a racially neutral reason for the challenge is the court required to conduct a sensitive inquiry.” Id. at 338 , 863 S.W.2d at 273 (emphasis added); see, e.g., Wooten v. State, 325 Ark. 510 , 931 S.W.2d 408 (1996); Prowell v. State, 324 Ark. 335 , 921 S.W.2d 585 (1996); Bell v. State, 324 Ark. 258 , 920 S.W.2d 821 (1996); Cooper v. State, 324 Ark. 135 , 919 S.W.2d 205 (1996); Mitchell v. State, 323 Ark. 116 , 913 S.W.2d 264 (1996); Heard v. State | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Hernandez v. New York
green
1 sentence1997The State’s reliance upon Hernandez v. New York, supra, is misplaced. | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Purkett v. Elem
green
2 sentences1997Certainly this was not a proper interpretation of Batson as shown by the United States Supreme Court’s subsequent decision in Purkett v. Elem, 514 U.S. 765 (1995), which provides that: Under our Batson jurisprudence, once the opponent of a peremptory challenge has made out a prima facie case of racial discrimination (step 1), the burden of production shifts to the proponent of the strike to come forward with a race-neutral explanation (step 2). 1997Purkett v. Elem, 115 S.Ct. 1769 , 131 L.Ed.2d 834 (1995). | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Bell v. State
green
2 sentences1997The latter opinion contains the all-too-familiar and often-cited sentence, “Only if the defendant makes a prima facie case and the State fails to give a racially neutral reason for the challenge is the court required to conduct a sensitive inquiry.” Id. at 338 , 863 S.W.2d at 273 (emphasis added); see, e.g., Wooten v. State, 325 Ark. 510 , 931 S.W.2d 408 (1996); Prowell v. State, 324 Ark. 335 , 921 S.W.2d 585 (1996); Bell v. State, 324 Ark. 258 , 920 S.W.2d 821 (1996); Cooper v. State, 324 Ark. 135 , 919 S.W.2d 205 (1996); Mitchell v. State, 323 Ark. 116 , 913 S.W.2d 264 (1996); Heard v. State 1997The latter opinion contains the all-too-familiar and often-cited sentence, “Only if the defendant makes a prima facie case and the State fails to give a racially neutral reason for the challenge is the court required to conduct a sensitive inquiry.” Id. at 338 , 863 S.W.2d at 273 (emphasis added); see, e.g., Wooten v. State, 325 Ark. 510 , 931 S.W.2d 408 (1996); Prowell v. State, 324 Ark. 335 , 921 S.W.2d 585 (1996); Bell v. State, 324 Ark. 258 , 920 S.W.2d 821 (1996); Cooper v. State, 324 Ark. 135 , 919 S.W.2d 205 (1996); Mitchell v. State, 323 Ark. 116 , 913 S.W.2d 264 (1996); Heard v. State | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Ward v. State
green
2 sentences1997See Mitchell v. State, 295 Ark. 341 , 750 S.W.2d 936 (1988); Ward v. State, 293 Ark. 88 , 733 S.W.2d 728 (1987). 1997See Mitchell v. State, 295 Ark. 341 , 750 S.W.2d 936 (1988); Ward v. State, 293 Ark. 88 , 733 S.W.2d 728 (1987). | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Reams v. State
green
2 sentences1997The latter opinion contains the all-too-familiar and often-cited sentence, “Only if the defendant makes a prima facie case and the State fails to give a racially neutral reason for the challenge is the court required to conduct a sensitive inquiry.” Id. at 338 , 863 S.W.2d at 273 (emphasis added); see, e.g., Wooten v. State, 325 Ark. 510 , 931 S.W.2d 408 (1996); Prowell v. State, 324 Ark. 335 , 921 S.W.2d 585 (1996); Bell v. State, 324 Ark. 258 , 920 S.W.2d 821 (1996); Cooper v. State, 324 Ark. 135 , 919 S.W.2d 205 (1996); Mitchell v. State, 323 Ark. 116 , 913 S.W.2d 264 (1996); Heard v. State 1997The latter opinion contains the all-too-familiar and often-cited sentence, “Only if the defendant makes a prima facie case and the State fails to give a racially neutral reason for the challenge is the court required to conduct a sensitive inquiry.” Id. at 338 , 863 S.W.2d at 273 (emphasis added); see, e.g., Wooten v. State, 325 Ark. 510 , 931 S.W.2d 408 (1996); Prowell v. State, 324 Ark. 335 , 921 S.W.2d 585 (1996); Bell v. State, 324 Ark. 258 , 920 S.W.2d 821 (1996); Cooper v. State, 324 Ark. 135 , 919 S.W.2d 205 (1996); Mitchell v. State, 323 Ark. 116 , 913 S.W.2d 264 (1996); Heard v. State | 1 | 1997–1997 |
Sonny v. Balch Motor Co.
green
1 sentence1996Sonny v. Balch Motor Co., 52 Ark. | 1 | 1996–1996 |
Hollamon v. State
green
2 sentences1993Tucker v. State, 313 Ark. 624 , 855 S.W.2d 948 (1993); Hollamon v. State, 312 Ark. 48 , 846 S.W.2d 663 (1993); Walker v. State, 308 Ark. 498 , 825 S.W.2d 822 (1992); Colbert v. State, 304 Ark. 250 , 801 S.W.2d 643 (1990). 1993Tucker v. State, 313 Ark. 624 , 855 S.W.2d 948 (1993); Hollamon v. State, 312 Ark. 48 , 846 S.W.2d 663 (1993); Walker v. State, 308 Ark. 498 , 825 S.W.2d 822 (1992); Colbert v. State, 304 Ark. 250 , 801 S.W.2d 643 (1990). | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Walker v. State
green
2 sentences1993Tucker v. State, 313 Ark. 624 , 855 S.W.2d 948 (1993); Hollamon v. State, 312 Ark. 48 , 846 S.W.2d 663 (1993); Walker v. State, 308 Ark. 498 , 825 S.W.2d 822 (1992); Colbert v. State, 304 Ark. 250 , 801 S.W.2d 643 (1990). 1993Tucker v. State, 313 Ark. 624 , 855 S.W.2d 948 (1993); Hollamon v. State, 312 Ark. 48 , 846 S.W.2d 663 (1993); Walker v. State, 308 Ark. 498 , 825 S.W.2d 822 (1992); Colbert v. State, 304 Ark. 250 , 801 S.W.2d 643 (1990). | 1 | 1993–1993 |
Tucker v. State
green
2 sentences1993Tucker v. State, 313 Ark. 624 , 855 S.W.2d 948 (1993); Hollamon v. State, 312 Ark. 48 , 846 S.W.2d 663 (1993); Walker v. State, 308 Ark. 498 , 825 S.W.2d 822 (1992); Colbert v. State, 304 Ark. 250 , 801 S.W.2d 643 (1990). 1993Tucker v. State, 313 Ark. 624 , 855 S.W.2d 948 (1993); Hollamon v. State, 312 Ark. 48 , 846 S.W.2d 663 (1993); Walker v. State, 308 Ark. 498 , 825 S.W.2d 822 (1992); Colbert v. State, 304 Ark. 250 , 801 S.W.2d 643 (1990). | 1 | 1993–1993 |
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.