104 Arkansas opinions name it 2 courts 1968–2026 10 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 |
|---|---|---|
Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Keltongreen2 sentences2012Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Kelton, 305 Ark. 173 , 806 S.W.2d 373 (1991). 2012Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. v. Kelton, 305 Ark. 173 , 806 S.W.2d 373 (1991). | 3 | 5 |
Ventress v. Stategreen2 sentences2020See Ventress v. State, 303 Ark. 194, 197 , 794 S.W.2d 619, 620 (1990). 2020See Ventress v. State, 303 Ark. 194, 197 , 794 S.W.2d 619, 620 (1990). | 3 | 4 |
Barnes v. Everettgreen2 sentences2014Id. 2014Id. | 2 | 7 |
State v. Jonesgreen2 sentences2025As the supreme court explained in State v. Jones, Plainly, section 5-1-110(c) does not delegate the decision regarding the propriety of a lesser included offense instruction to the defendant, but requires the trial court to determine whether the proffered instruction concerns a lesser included offense and, if so, whether a rational basis exists for a verdict acquitting the defendant of the greater offense and convicting him of the lesser. . . . [T]he General Assembly’s purpose for this provision was to authorize the trial court “to refuse to instruct on an included offense when the evidence ma 2025As the supreme court explained in State v. Jones, Plainly, section 5-1-110(c) does not delegate the decision regarding the propriety of a lesser included offense instruction to the defendant, but requires the trial court to determine whether the proffered instruction concerns a lesser included offense and, if so, whether a rational basis exists for a verdict acquitting the defendant of the greater offense and convicting him of the lesser. . . . [T]he General Assembly’s purpose for this provision was to authorize the trial court “to refuse to instruct on an included offense when the evidence ma | 2 | 2 |
Wallace v. Stategreen2 sentences2006See Ventress v. State, 303 Ark. 194 , 794 S.W.2d 619 (1990) (citing Wallace v. State, 270 Ark. 17 , 603 S.W.2d 399 (1980)); Henderson v. State, 284 Ark. 493 , 684 S.W.2d 231 (1985). 2006See Ventress v. State, 303 Ark. 194 , 794 S.W.2d 619 (1990) (citing Wallace v. State, 270 Ark. 17 , 603 S.W.2d 399 (1980)); Henderson v. State, 284 Ark. 493 , 684 S.W.2d 231 (1985). | 2 | 2 |
Edwards v. Stillsgreen2 sentences2016Edwards v. Stills, 335 Ark. 470 , 984 S.W.2d 366 (1998). 2016Edwards v. Stills, 335 Ark. 470 , 984 S.W.2d 366 (1998). | 1 | 4 |
Bedell v. Williamsgreen2 sentences2013Id. 2012Id. | 1 | 3 |
Davis v. Stategreen2 sentences2018See Davis v. State , 2009 Ark. 478 , 348 S.W.3d 553 . 2018See Davis v. State , 2009 Ark. 478 , 348 S.W.3d 553 . | 1 | 2 |
Misskelley v. Stategreen2 sentences2010Jackson v. State, 359 Ark. 297 , 197 S.W.3d 468 (2004); see also Misskelley v. State, 323 Ark. 449 , 915 S.W.2d 702 (1996) (holding no error in rejecting the appellant’s proffered instruction, even though that statement was based on language from case law, when the AMCI instruction was a proper statement of the law). 2010Jackson v. State, 359 Ark. 297 , 197 S.W.3d 468 (2004); see also Misskelley v. State, 323 Ark. 449 , 915 S.W.2d 702 (1996) (holding no error in rejecting the appellant’s proffered instruction, even though that statement was based on language from case law, when the AMCI instruction was a proper statement of the law). | 1 | 2 |
Hill v. Stategreen2 sentences1996Hill v. State, 318 Ark. 408 , 887 S.W.2d 275 (1994); Misskelley v. State, supra. Thus, we conclude that it was not error to refuse the appellant’s proffered instruction. 1996Hill v. State, 318 Ark. 408 , 887 S.W.2d 275 (1994); Misskelley v. State, supra. Thus, we conclude that it was not error to refuse the appellant’s proffered instruction. | 1 | 2 |
RODNEY HARMON v. STATE OF ARKANSASgreen1 sentence2023See, e.g., Harmon, supra. Gould’s argument that he was entitled to the proffered instruction because “the jury could have rejected the State’s assertion that [his] level of intoxication was the proximate cause of Mr. Brayfield’s death” and could have concluded, instead, that Brayfield’s death was caused by “non-alcohol related negligence” is of no moment and does not accurately reflect what is required to sustain a conviction for felony negligent homicide. | 1 | 1 |
Stivers v. Stategreen2 sentences2020If a proffered instruction was not a correct statement of the law, that is a “valid and appropriate reason to refuse to give a particular jury instruction.” Stivers v. State, 354 Ark. 140, 146 , 118 S.W.3d 558, 562 (2003). 2020If a proffered instruction was not a correct statement of the law, that is a “valid and appropriate reason to refuse to give a particular jury instruction.” Stivers v. State, 354 Ark. 140, 146 , 118 S.W.3d 558, 562 (2003). | 1 | 1 |
| Pope v. Overtongreen | 1 | 1 |
| Byme, Inc. v. Ivygreen | 1 | 1 |
| Jones v. Stategreen | 1 | 1 |
| Camargo v. Stategreen | 1 | 1 |
| Greene v. Stategreen | 1 | 1 |
| Pruett v. Stategreen | 1 | 1 |
| Fisher v. Valco Farmsgreen | 1 | 1 |
| Crowder v. Flippogreen | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Arkansas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Coca-Cola Bottling Co. v. Priddy
green
2 sentences2018Coca-Cola Bottling Co. v. Priddy , 328 Ark. 666 , 945 S.W.2d 355 (1997). 2018Coca-Cola Bottling Co. v. Priddy , 328 Ark. 666 , 945 S.W.2d 355 (1997). | 5 | 1998–2018 |
James Derrick Grubbs v. State of Arkansas
green
2 sentences2025Id. at 4, 592 S.W.3d at 691 . 2025Grubbs v. State, 2020 Ark. 42, at 4 , 592 S.W.3d 688, 691 . | 4 | 2020–2025 |
Nelson v. Stubblefield
neutral
2 sentences2021Nelson v. Stubblefield, 2009 Ark. 256 , 308 S.W.3d 586 . 2021Nelson v. Stubblefield, 2009 Ark. 256 , 308 S.W.3d 586 . | 4 | 2013–2021 |
Walley v. State
green
2 sentences2019In Pokatilov, our supreme court affirmed the circuit court’s use of discretion in refusing to give a non-AMI instruction, stating that “just because a proffered instruction may be a correct statement of the law, that does not mean a circuit court must give the instruction to the jury.” Id. at 7–8, 526 S.W.3d at 856 (citing Walley v. State, 353 Ark. 586 , 112 S.W3d 349 (2003)). 2018Walley , 353 Ark. at 601 , 112 S.W.3d at 357 . | 4 | 2008–2019 |
Southern Farm Bureau Casualty Insurance v. Daggett
green
2 sentences2018Id. 2018Id. | 4 | 2004–2018 |
Barker v. Clark
green
2 sentences2014Barker v. Clark, 343 Ark. 8 , 33 S.W.3d 476 (2000). 2014Barker v. Clark, 343 Ark. 8 , 33 S.W.3d 476 (2000). | 3 | 2004–2014 |
Wallace v. State
green
2 sentences2009Robertson v. State, 2009 Ark. 430 , 347 S.W.3d 460 ; Wallace v. State, 326 Ark. 376 , 931 S.W.2d 113 (1996). 2009Robertson v. State, 2009 Ark. 430 , 347 S.W.3d 460 ; Wallace v. State, 326 Ark. 376 , 931 S.W.2d 113 (1996). | 3 | 1997–2009 |
Henderson v. State
green
2 sentences2006See Ventress v. State, 303 Ark. 194 , 794 S.W.2d 619 (1990) (citing Wallace v. State, 270 Ark. 17 , 603 S.W.2d 399 (1980)); Henderson v. State, 284 Ark. 493 , 684 S.W.2d 231 (1985). 2006See Ventress v. State, 303 Ark. 194 , 794 S.W.2d 619 (1990) (citing Wallace v. State, 270 Ark. 17 , 603 S.W.2d 399 (1980)); Henderson v. State, 284 Ark. 493 , 684 S.W.2d 231 (1985). | 3 | 1999–2006 |
Perry v. State
green
2 sentences2020Id. 2016Id. | 2 | 2016–2020 |
Pokatilov v. State
green
2 sentences2019In Pokatilov, our supreme court affirmed the circuit court’s use of discretion in refusing to give a non-AMI instruction, stating that “just because a proffered instruction may be a correct statement of the law, that does not mean a circuit court must give the instruction to the jury.” Id. at 7–8, 526 S.W.3d at 856 (citing Walley v. State, 353 Ark. 586 , 112 S.W3d 349 (2003)). 2019In Pokatilov, our supreme court affirmed the circuit court’s use of discretion in refusing to give a non-AMI instruction, stating that “just because a proffered instruction may be a correct statement of the law, that does not mean a circuit court must give the instruction to the jury.” Id. at 7–8, 526 S.W.3d at 856 (citing Walley v. State, 353 Ark. 586 , 112 S.W3d 349 (2003)). | 2 | 2019–2019 |
ProAssurance Indemnity Co. v. Metheny
green
2 sentences2017Id. [ mFarm Bureau’s argument is premised on its theory that Davenport bore the burden of proving that her residence was not unoccupied. 2014Id. | 2 | 2014–2017 |
Gilliam v. Thompson
green
2 sentences2011Id. 1994Gilliam v. Thompson, 313 Ark. 698 , 856 S.W.2d 877 (1993). | 2 | 1994–2011 |
Brown v. State
green
2 sentences2003Thus, we hold the trial court was correct in refusing it." Brown, 321 Ark. at 416 , 903 S.W.2d 160 . 2003Thus, we hold the trial court was correct in refusing it.” Brown, 321 Ark. at 416 . | 2 | 2001–2003 |
Shanteria Montgomery v. State of Arkansas
green
1 sentence2026As this court has explained, “it is not erroneous for the circuit court to decline to give the proffered instruction on the lesser offense when the evidence clearly shows that the defendant is either guilty of the greater offense charged or innocent.” Id. at 11, 689 S.W.3d at 470 . | 1 | 2026–2026 |
Atkinson v. State
green
2 sentences2024Id., 64 S.W.3d at 268 . 2024Id., 64 S.W.3d at 268 . | 1 | 2024–2024 |
Douglas v. State
green
2 sentences2021In support, he cites the dissenting opinions in Douglas v. State, 2019 Ark. 57 , 567 S.W.3d 483 (Hart, J., dissenting), and Dixon v. State, 2019 Ark. 245 , 581 S.W.3d 505 (Hart, J., dissenting). 2021In support, he cites the dissenting opinions in Douglas v. State, 2019 Ark. 57 , 567 S.W.3d 483 (Hart, J., dissenting), and Dixon v. State, 2019 Ark. 245 , 581 S.W.3d 505 (Hart, J., dissenting). | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Derrick A. Dixon v. State of Arkansas
neutral
1 sentence2021In support, he cites the dissenting opinions in Douglas v. State, 2019 Ark. 57 , 567 S.W.3d 483 (Hart, J., dissenting), and Dixon v. State, 2019 Ark. 245 , 581 S.W.3d 505 (Hart, J., dissenting). | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Sealing Devices, Inc. v. McKinney
neutral
1 sentence2020Id. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
| Sipe v. State green | 1 | 2019–2019 |
| Pokatilov v. State green | 1 | 2019–2019 |
| Chapman v. State green | 1 | 2018–2018 |
| Jester v. State green | 1 | 2017–2017 |
| Kemp v. State green | 1 | 2017–2017 |
| Anderson v. State green | 1 | 2016–2016 |
| Kinsey v. State green | 1 | 2016–2016 |
| Bond v. State green | 1 | 2014–2014 |
| Millsap v. Williams green | 1 | 2014–2014 |
| Jones v. State green | 1 | 2012–2012 |
| Armstrong Remodeling & Construction, LLC v. Cardenas green | 1 | 2012–2012 |
| Vidos v. State green | 1 | 2012–2012 |
| Ludwig v. Bella Casa, LLC green | 1 | 2012–2012 |
| Travis Lumber Co. v. Deichman green | 1 | 2010–2010 |
| Jackson v. State green | 1 | 2010–2010 |
| Robertson v. State green | 1 | 2009–2009 |
| Gilmore v. Taylor green | 1 | 2009–2009 |
| Victor v. Nebraska green | 1 | 2008–2008 |
| McCoy v. State green | 1 | 2008–2008 |
| Williams v. First Unum Life Insurance green | 1 | 2007–2007 |
| Sheridan v. State green | 1 | 2006–2006 |
| Dansby v. State green | 1 | 2006–2006 |
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.