Skip to main content

Cummings v. State

Citations

  • 110 S.W.3d 272
  • 353 Ark. 618
  • 2003 Ark. LEXIS 341

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • concluding that an objection was untimely when it was made after the evidence already had been admitted
  • holding that an affidavit stating that the officer feared that the suspect would destroy child pornography because he knew he was under investigation was sufficient to support a nighttime warrant, where the child pornography was kept in electronic form and could easily be destroyed
  • holding that an affidavit stating that the officer feared that the suspect would destroy child pornography because he knew he was under investigation was sufficient to support a nighttime warrant, where the child pornography was kept in electronic form and could easily be destroyed
  • stating that whether an image is lewd is a question for the fact finder
  • noting that Dost factors distinguish between innocent photographs and child pornography

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Jim Hannah

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

36 cases in this archive cite this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Cites

23 cases in this archive are cited by this case; the 20 most cited are listed.

Other cases with this name

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.