controlled substance violation (Arkansas) · Go Syfert
← Arkansas issues

controlled substance violation in Arkansas

6 Arkansas opinions name it 1 courts 1995–2024 1 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.

Followed or applied (0)

CaseFollowedCited
No positive-treatment citations attached to this issue in Arkansas.

Distinguished, questioned or overruled (0)

CaseNegativeCited
No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Arkansas. Read the followed side critically anyway.

Also cited on this issue (6)

CaseCitedYears
Cave v. State neutral
arkctapp · 2017
1 sentence

2024Ownership of the dwelling is not an element of the crime.17 Pettis testified that Cantrell lived in the residence 13 Reynolds v. State, 2017 Ark.

12024–2024
Coger v. State green
arkctapp · 2017
1 sentence

2018Id. *519 A person is subject to enhanced sentencing of an additional 10-year term of imprisonment if the person "[p]ossesses a controlled substance in violation of § 5-64-419 and the offense is a Class C felony or greater" and "[t]he offense is committed on or within" 1000 feet of the real property of a church.

12018–2018
Curtis v. State green
arkctapp · 2015
2 sentences

2017Arkansas Code Annotated section 5-64—402(a)(2) provides that it is unlawful for any person “knowingly to keep or maintain any store, shop, warehouse, dwelling, building, or other structure or place or premise that is resorted to by a person for the purpose of using or obtaining a controlled substance in violation of this chapter or that is used for keeping a controlled substance in violation of this chapter.” In Curtis v. State, 2015 Ark.

2017App. 167 , 457 S.W.3d 700 , we held that evidence was sufficient to support a conviction for maintaining a drug premises where the confidential informant testified that the appellant lived in the trailer, that the informant gave the appellant money in the living room of the trailer, and that the appellant then went to a bedroom and removed methamphetamine from a larger bag and placed it into a smaller bag and gave it to the informant.

12017–2017
Kimbrell v. State green
arkctapp · 2016
1 sentence

2016The court determined that Kimbrell’s drug use during his probationary period “could have resulted in his probation being 3 Cite as 2016 Ark.

12016–2016
Franklin v. State green
arkctapp · 1998
2 sentences

2008Ark.Code Ann. § 5-64-402(a)(2) (Supp.2005); 60 Ark.App. 198 , 962 S.W.2d 370 (1998).

2008Ark.Code Ann. § 5-64-402(a)(2) (Supp.2005); 60 Ark.App. 198 , 962 S.W.2d 370 (1998).

12008–2008
Gallia v. State green
ark · 1985
2 sentences

1995Gallia v. State, 287 Ark. 176 , 697 S.W.2d 108 (1985).

1995Gallia v. State, 287 Ark. 176 , 697 S.W.2d 108 (1985).

11995–1995

Where else courts name it

CA 47 (1975–2025) PA 35 (1988–2025) OH 31 (1982–2025) WA 25 (1984–2025) NY 18 (1988–2013) MI 18 (1988–2019) MO 14 (1975–2015) KS 13 (1983–2014) TX 10 (1979–2014) ND 9 (1979–2022) VA 8 (1994–2023) FL 8 (1981–2013) AL 8 (2002–2025) GA 8 (1989–2023) CT 7 (1987–2022) HI 7 (1999–2023) ID 7 (1997–2019) IN 6 (1998–2018) NC 6 (1986–2019) WY 6 (2008–2025) AR 6 (1995–2024) KY 5 (2019–2025) OR 5 (1996–2016) IA 5 (1996–2020) MN 4 (2006–2019) UT 4 (1993–2019) WI 4 (1987–2025) MA 4 (1993–2014) MS 3 (1973–2018) DE 3 (2016–2017) LA 3 (2006–2012) NV 3 (2000–2020) IL 3 (1974–2016) NE 2 (2002–2023) DC 2 (1996–2013) WV 2 (1993–2020) TN 2 (2011–2012)

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.

← Caselaw search · G Cite Topics · Brief Check