6 Arkansas opinions name it 2 courts 1998–2018 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 |
|---|---|---|
Franks v. Delawaregreen2 sentences2005Specifically, appellants assert that Officer Richardson “omitted relevant facts, made false statements or, at best, recklessly disregarded the truth.” Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154 (1978), contains the proper analysis for determining whether false material, misleading information, or omissions render an affidavit in support of a search warrant fatally defective. 2005Specifically, appellants assert that Officer Richardson “omitted relevant facts, made false statements or, at best, recklessly disregarded the truth.” Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154 (1978), contains the proper analysis for determining whether false material, misleading information, or omissions render an affidavit in support of a search warrant fatally defective. | 1 | 4 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Arkansas. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
State v. Cherry
green
2 sentences2018State v. Cherry , 341 Ark. 924 , 931, 20 S.W.3d 354 , 358 (2000). 2018State v. Cherry , 341 Ark. 924 , 931, 20 S.W.3d 354 , 358 (2000). | 1 | 2018–2018 |
Franks v. State
green
2 sentences2018In Franks v. State , 306 Ark. 75 , 811 S.W.2d 301 (1991), the jurors used a dictionary to look up the definition of "premeditation." This court affirmed the denial of Franks's motion for new trial, writing: "While we agree that, generally, it is misconduct for a jury to seek out reading material without the knowledge of the court and the parties, prejudice does not occur in every case." Furthermore, this court has observed that a defendant is entitled to a fair trial, not a perfect trial. 2018In Franks v. State , 306 Ark. 75 , 811 S.W.2d 301 (1991), the jurors used a dictionary to look up the definition of "premeditation." This court affirmed the denial of Franks's motion for new trial, writing: "While we agree that, generally, it is misconduct for a jury to seek out reading material without the knowledge of the court and the parties, prejudice does not occur in every case." Furthermore, this court has observed that a defendant is entitled to a fair trial, not a perfect trial. | 1 | 2018–2018 |
State v. Rufus
green
2 sentences2011Rufus, 338 Ark. at 314 , 993 S.W.2d at 495 . 2011Rufus, 338 Ark. at 314 , 993 S.W.2d at 495 . | 1 | 2011–2011 |
Collins v. State
green
2 sentences2011Citing to Collins v. State, 280 Ark. 453 , 658 S.W.2d 877 (1983), Moss next argues that |7Petective Marx’s affidavit is defective because it failed-to reference a specific time when Moss and Thomas allegedly smoked marijuana in the residence and failed to establish that a criminal activity was occurring. 2011Citing to Collins v. State, 280 Ark. 453 , 658 S.W.2d 877 (1983), Moss next argues that |7Petective Marx’s affidavit is defective because it failed-to reference a specific time when Moss and Thomas allegedly smoked marijuana in the residence and failed to establish that a criminal activity was occurring. | 1 | 2011–2011 |
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.