14 Arkansas opinions name it 2 courts 2000–2025 5 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 |
|---|---|---|
JIMMY SMITH v. STATE OF ARKANSASgreen1 sentence2020Swanigan v. State, 2019 Ark. 294 , 586 S.W.3d 137 ; see also Smith v. State, 2018 Ark. 396 , 562 S.W.3d 2 Although Barnett makes a conclusory claim that Black received favorable treatment in exchange for his testimony, Barnett offers no evidence to support his claim, and a court considering a claim of a Brady violation in a coram nobis petition is not required to take a petitioner’s allegations at face value without substantiation—which Barnett fails to provide. | 1 | 1 |
Detherow v. Stategreen2 sentences2017See Jones v. State, 2014 Ark. 448, at 6-7 , 486 S.W.3d 743, 748 (per curiam) (“The burden is entirely on the claimant to provide facts that affirmatively support his or her claims of prejudice; neither conclusory statements nor allegations without factual substantiation are sufficient to overcome the presumption that counsel was effective.”); see also Detherow v. State, 2015 Ark. 447, at 5 , 476 S.W.3d 155, 159 (per curiam). 2017See Jones v. State, 2014 Ark. 448, at 6-7 , 486 S.W.3d 743, 748 (per curiam) (“The burden is entirely on the claimant to provide facts that affirmatively support his or her claims of prejudice; neither conclusory statements nor allegations without factual substantiation are sufficient to overcome the presumption that counsel was effective.”); see also Detherow v. State, 2015 Ark. 447, at 5 , 476 S.W.3d 155, 159 (per curiam). | 1 | 1 |
Nance v. Stategreen2 sentences2017“Conclusory allegations that are unsupported by facts do not provide a basis for either.an evidentiary hearing or postconviction relief.” Nance v. State, 339 Ark. 192, 195 , 4 S.W.3d 501, 503 (1999). | ifiIn this case, Burnside has simply stated a conclusory claim that the motorcycle gang’s presence outside the courthouse created an atmosphere of prejudice. 2017“Conclusory allegations that are unsupported by facts do not provide a basis for either.an evidentiary hearing or postconviction relief.” Nance v. State, 339 Ark. 192, 195 , 4 S.W.3d 501, 503 (1999). | ifiIn this case, Burnside has simply stated a conclusory claim that the motorcycle gang’s presence outside the courthouse created an atmosphere of prejudice. | 1 | 1 |
Jones v. Stategreen2 sentences2017See Jones v. State, 2014 Ark. 448, at 6-7 , 486 S.W.3d 743, 748 (per curiam) (“The burden is entirely on the claimant to provide facts that affirmatively support his or her claims of prejudice; neither conclusory statements nor allegations without factual substantiation are sufficient to overcome the presumption that counsel was effective.”); see also Detherow v. State, 2015 Ark. 447, at 5 , 476 S.W.3d 155, 159 (per curiam). 2017See Jones v. State, 2014 Ark. 448, at 6-7 , 486 S.W.3d 743, 748 (per curiam) (“The burden is entirely on the claimant to provide facts that affirmatively support his or her claims of prejudice; neither conclusory statements nor allegations without factual substantiation are sufficient to overcome the presumption that counsel was effective.”); see also Detherow v. State, 2015 Ark. 447, at 5 , 476 S.W.3d 155, 159 (per curiam). | 1 | 1 |
Johnson v. Stategreen2 sentences2010See, e.g., Johnson v. State, 321 Ark. 117 , 900 S.W.2d 940 (1995). . 2010See, e.g., Johnson v. State, 321 Ark. 117 , 900 S.W.2d 940 (1995). . | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Arkansas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Ortega v. State
green
2 sentences2021Ortega v. State, 2017 Ark. 365 , 533 S.W.3d 68 . 2021Ortega v. State, 2017 Ark. 365 , 533 S.W.3d 68 . | 2 | 2020–2021 |
James Nelson Eng. v. State
neutral
1 sentence2025Id. | 1 | 2025–2025 |
Dawson v. Delaware
green
1 sentence2022That case bars admission of a defendant’s beliefs and associations “when those beliefs have no bearing on the issue being tried.” 503 U.S. at 168 . | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Darrell Dennis v. State of Arkansas
green
2 sentences2022Dennis v. State, 2020 Ark. 28 , 592 S.W.3d 646 . 2022Dennis v. State, 2020 Ark. 28 , 592 S.W.3d 646 . | 1 | 2022–2022 |
Nicholas Addison v. State of Arkansas
neutral
2 sentences2021Addison v. State, 2020 Ark. 273 , 606 S.W.3d 73 . 2021Addison v. State, 2020 Ark. 273 , 606 S.W.3d 73 . | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Thacker v. State
green
2 sentences2020Thacker v. State, 2016 Ark. 350 , 500 S.W.3d 736 . 2020Thacker v. State, 2016 Ark. 350 , 500 S.W.3d 736 . | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Terry Swanigan v. State of Arkansas
neutral
1 sentence2020Swanigan v. State, 2019 Ark. 294 , 586 S.W.3d 137 ; see also Smith v. State, 2018 Ark. 396 , 562 S.W.3d 2 Although Barnett makes a conclusory claim that Black received favorable treatment in exchange for his testimony, Barnett offers no evidence to support his claim, and a court considering a claim of a Brady violation in a coram nobis petition is not required to take a petitioner’s allegations at face value without substantiation—which Barnett fails to provide. | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Charles Edward Jones v. State of Arkansas
neutral
1 sentence2020Jones, 2019 Ark. 340 , 588 S.W.3d 33 . | 1 | 2020–2020 |
Green v. State
green
2 sentences2019Green v. State, 2016 Ark. 386 , 502 S.W.3d 524 . 2019Green v. State, 2016 Ark. 386 , 502 S.W.3d 524 . | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Munnerlyn v. State
green
1 sentence2014Munnerlyn v. State, 2013 Ark. 339 (per curiam); Glaze v. State, 2013 Ark. 141 (per curiam). | 1 | 2014–2014 |
State v. Gilbert
green
1 sentence2000Kaestal v. State, 274 Ark. 550 , 636 S.W.2d 940 (1982). 2 Mr. Hinkston also makes a conclusory claim that the admission of his statements might have violated his Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses. | 1 | 2000–2000 |
Kaestel v. State
green
1 sentence2000Kaestal v. State, 274 Ark. 550 , 636 S.W.2d 940 (1982). 2 Mr. Hinkston also makes a conclusory claim that the admission of his statements might have violated his Sixth Amendment right to confront witnesses. | 1 | 2000–2000 |
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.