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.
13 Arkansas opinions name it 2 courts 1974–2024 4 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 |
|---|---|---|
Thacker v. Stategreen2 sentences2020Williams’s claim rests on his own allegations, “which need not be considered to be inherently truthful.” Jackson v. State, 2009 Ark. 176 , at 5 (per curiam); see also Thacker v. State, 2016 Ark. 350, at 5 , 500 S.W.3d 736, 740 (“A court considering a claim of a Brady violation in a coram-nobis petition is not required to take the petitioner’s allegations at face value without substantiation.”). 2020Williams’s claim rests on his own allegations, “which need not be considered to be inherently truthful.” Jackson v. State, 2009 Ark. 176 , at 5 (per curiam); see also Thacker v. State, 2016 Ark. 350, at 5 , 500 S.W.3d 736, 740 (“A court considering a claim of a Brady violation in a coram-nobis petition is not required to take the petitioner’s allegations at face value without substantiation.”). | 1 | 1 |
McCoy v. Montgomerygreen2 sentences2012See McCoy v. Montgomery, 370 Ark. 333 , 259 S.W.3d 430 (2007); Yeakley v. Doss, 370 Ark. 122 , 257 S.W.3d 895 (2007). 2012See McCoy v. Montgomery, 370 Ark. 333 , 259 S.W.3d 430 (2007); Yeakley v. Doss, 370 Ark. 122 , 257 S.W.3d 895 (2007). | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Arkansas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
Demarcus Donnell Parker v. State of Arkansas
green
2 sentences2024Id., 660 S.W.3d at 824 . 2024Id., 660 S.W.3d at 824 . | 2 | 2024–2024 |
Novak v. State
green
1 sentence2021Unlike in Novak v. State, 287 Ark. 271 , 690 S.W.2d 499 (1985), on which Williams relies, Gilbert did not indicate that Williams had been arrested, convicted, or held in custody. | 1 | 2021–2021 |
J.Williams v. Kelley
green
2 sentences2021Williams v. Kelley, 2017 Ark. 200 , 521 S.W.3d 104 . 2021Williams v. Kelley, 2017 Ark. 200 , 521 S.W.3d 104 . | 1 | 2021–2021 |
Hamrick v. State
neutral
1 sentence2019Id. | 1 | 2019–2019 |
Poland v. Kelley
neutral
1 sentence2017Poland v. Kelley, 2015 Ark. 401 , 2015 WL 6560627 (per curiam). | 1 | 2017–2017 |
Yeakley v. Doss
green
2 sentences2012See McCoy v. Montgomery, 370 Ark. 333 , 259 S.W.3d 430 (2007); Yeakley v. Doss, 370 Ark. 122 , 257 S.W.3d 895 (2007). 2012See McCoy v. Montgomery, 370 Ark. 333 , 259 S.W.3d 430 (2007); Yeakley v. Doss, 370 Ark. 122 , 257 S.W.3d 895 (2007). | 1 | 2012–2012 |
Helena Contracting Co. v. Williams
green
1 sentence2009Ibid. | 1 | 2009–2009 |
In re Williams
neutral
2 sentences1999The Committee held a hearing and by petition herein has set out the following determinations: (1) The Committee adopted the master’s findings set out in our July 22, 1999 opinion in In Re: Williams, 338 Ark. 479 , 995 S.W.2d 349 . (2) The Committee granted Mr. Williams’s motion to withdraw his Section 71 response filed with the Committee on July 16, 1999. 1999The Committee held a hearing and by petition herein has set out the following determinations: (1) The Committee adopted the master’s findings set out in our July 22, 1999 opinion in In Re: Williams, 338 Ark. 479 , 995 S.W.2d 349 . (2) The Committee granted Mr. Williams’s motion to withdraw his Section 71 response filed with the Committee on July 16, 1999. | 1 | 1999–1999 |
Crockett & Brown, P.A. v. Wilson
green
2 sentences1998Wright v. Eddinger, 320 Ark. 151 , 894 S.W.2d 937 (1995); Crockett & Brown, P.A. v. Wilson, 314 Ark. 578 , 864 S.W.2d 244 (1993). 1998Wright v. Eddinger, 320 Ark. 151 , 894 S.W.2d 937 (1995); Crockett & Brown, P.A. v. Wilson, 314 Ark. 578 , 864 S.W.2d 244 (1993). | 1 | 1998–1998 |
Wright v. Eddinger
green
2 sentences1998Wright v. Eddinger, 320 Ark. 151 , 894 S.W.2d 937 (1995); Crockett & Brown, P.A. v. Wilson, 314 Ark. 578 , 864 S.W.2d 244 (1993). 1998Wright v. Eddinger, 320 Ark. 151 , 894 S.W.2d 937 (1995); Crockett & Brown, P.A. v. Wilson, 314 Ark. 578 , 864 S.W.2d 244 (1993). | 1 | 1998–1998 |
Plotts v. State
green
2 sentences1990In Plotts v. State, 297 Ark. 66 , 759 S.W.2d 793 (1988), the court relaxed the rigidity of the Williams rule, and recognized cases from other jurisdictions holding that the prosecution can sufficiently link an accused to contraband found in an automobile occupied by more than one person by showing additional facts and circumstances indicating his knowledge and control of it such as 1) that the contraband was in plain view, 2) that the contraband was on the defendant’s person or with his personal effects, 3) that the contraband was found on the same side of the car as the defendant was sitting 1990In Plotts v. State, 297 Ark. 66 , 759 S.W.2d 793 (1988), the court relaxed the rigidity of the Williams rule, and recognized cases from other jurisdictions holding that the prosecution can sufficiently link an accused to contraband found in an automobile occupied by more than one person by showing additional facts and circumstances indicating his knowledge and control of it such as 1) that the contraband was in plain view, 2) that the contraband was on the defendant’s person or with his personal effects, 3) that the contraband was found on the same side of the car as the defendant was sitting | 1 | 1990–1990 |
Edwards v. T. H. Epperson & Son House Moving Co.
green
2 sentences1974Baucom v. City of North Little Rock, 249 Ark. 848 , 462 S.W. 2d 229 ; Edwards v. Epperson, 246 Ark. 194 , 437 S.W. 2d 480 .” Since we agree with the appellant that there was no substantial evidence to support the verdict of the jury, and that the trial court should have granted Williams’ motion for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict of the jury, we shall not discuss the other points designated by Williams. 1974Baucom v. City of North Little Rock, 249 Ark. 848 , 462 S.W. 2d 229 ; Edwards v. Epperson, 246 Ark. 194 , 437 S.W. 2d 480 .” Since we agree with the appellant that there was no substantial evidence to support the verdict of the jury, and that the trial court should have granted Williams’ motion for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict of the jury, we shall not discuss the other points designated by Williams. | 1 | 1974–1974 |
Baucom v. City of North Little Rock
green
2 sentences1974Baucom v. City of North Little Rock, 249 Ark. 848 , 462 S.W. 2d 229 ; Edwards v. Epperson, 246 Ark. 194 , 437 S.W. 2d 480 .” Since we agree with the appellant that there was no substantial evidence to support the verdict of the jury, and that the trial court should have granted Williams’ motion for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict of the jury, we shall not discuss the other points designated by Williams. 1974Baucom v. City of North Little Rock, 249 Ark. 848 , 462 S.W. 2d 229 ; Edwards v. Epperson, 246 Ark. 194 , 437 S.W. 2d 480 .” Since we agree with the appellant that there was no substantial evidence to support the verdict of the jury, and that the trial court should have granted Williams’ motion for a judgment notwithstanding the verdict of the jury, we shall not discuss the other points designated by Williams. | 1 | 1974–1974 |
Satterfield v. Rebsamen Ford, Inc.
green
2 sentences1974In the case of Satterfield v. Rebsamen Ford, Inc., 253 Ark. 181 , 485 S.W. 2d 192 , we set out the test for granting a motion for judgment n.o.v. and in that case we said: “The statutory authority for judgment notwithstanding a verdict is found in Ark. 1974In the case of Satterfield v. Rebsamen Ford, Inc., 253 Ark. 181 , 485 S.W. 2d 192 , we set out the test for granting a motion for judgment n.o.v. and in that case we said: “The statutory authority for judgment notwithstanding a verdict is found in Ark. | 1 | 1974–1974 |
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.