Supreme Court of Arkansas· 4/10/2008
Flowers v. State
Citations
- 282 S.W.3d 767
- 373 Ark. 127
- 2008 Ark. LEXIS 245
How courts have described this case
Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.
- holding that, under Rule 701, it was not error to allow an officer to testify based on experience, training, and observation that, in his opinion, glass on a truck had been broken from outside rather than inside
- lay witnesses may provide opinions that are rationally based on their “experience, . . . training, and personal observation”
- testimony of an officer that a truck’s window had been broken on the outside did not require expert testimony because the officer’s testimony was rationally based on his experience, forensic training, and personal observation
- testimony of an officer that a truck’s window had been broken on the outside did not require expert testimony because the officer’s testimony was rationally based on his experience, forensic training, and personal observation
Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).
Judges: Tom Glaze
Read full opinion on CourtListenerCited by
19 cases in this archive cite this case.
- Holt v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas· 2011-09-29· cited 28×
- Williamson v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas· 2009-11-12· cited 23×
- Sales v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas· 2008-12-04· cited 18×
- Law v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas· 2009-02-05· cited 10×
- Whiteside v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas· 2011-09-22· cited 10×
- Santiago Vasquez v. State of ArkansasCourt of Appeals of Arkansas· 2022-09-14· cited 7×
- Jacovan Bush v. State of ArkansasSupreme Court of Arkansas· 2024-05-09· cited 7×
- TARA KOLB v. STATE OF ARKANSASSupreme Court of Arkansas· 2021-03-11· cited 5×
- Krol v. StateCourt of Appeals of Arkansas· 2018-10-24· cited 5×
- Timothy Justin Joyner v. State of ArkansasSupreme Court of Arkansas· 2021-04-15· cited 5×
- Johnson v. StateCourt of Appeals of Arkansas· 2010-02-17· cited 4×
- Devon Romick v. State of ArkansasSupreme Court of Arkansas· 2025-05-01· cited 4×
- Sullivan v. StateCourt of Appeals of Arkansas· 2015-09-23· cited 3×
- Brown v. StateCourt of Appeals of Arkansas· 2010-02-17· cited 1×
- Vines v. StateCourt of Appeals of Arkansas· 2018-10-17· cited 1×
- CYNTHIA N. WHITE, PAUL R. WHITE, JENNIFER L. BARBER, TYLER R. WHITE, ASHLEY D. HOUGH, AND CHELSEA R. WHITE v. SUSAN R. RANDOLPH; TIMOTHY L. RANDOLPH, SR.; AND HARLEIGH MCKEYCourt of Appeals of Arkansas· 2025-05-28· cited 1×
- Boykin v. StateCourt of Appeals of Arkansas· 2012-04-18
- Leroy Jackson v. State of ArkansasCourt of Appeals of Arkansas· 2024-01-10
- Jason Lawson v. State of ArkansasCourt of Appeals of Arkansas· 2026-05-20
Cites
15 cases in this archive are cited by this case.
- Daubert v. Merrell Dow Pharmaceuticals, Inc.Supreme Court· 1993-06-28· cited 21,376×
- Kumho Tire Co. v. CarmichaelSupreme Court· 1999-03-23· cited 8,651×
- Farm Bureau Mutual Insurance v. FooteSupreme Court of Arkansas· 2000-04-20· cited 80×
- Sanford v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas· 1998-02-05· cited 79×
- Ross v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas· 2001-10-11· cited 73×
- Flowers v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas· 2005-05-05· cited 56×
- Jackson v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas· 2004-11-04· cited 48×
- Robinson v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas· 2003-05-29· cited 41×
- Coca-Cola Bottling Co. v. GillSupreme Court of Arkansas· 2003-03-13· cited 41×
- Clem v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas· 2002-11-21· cited 36×
- Bliss v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas· 1984-04-30· cited 36×
- Woolbright v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas· 2004-04-22· cited 25×
- Bridges v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas· 1997-02-24· cited 22×
- Benson v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas· 2004-04-22· cited 20×
- White v. StateSupreme Court of Arkansas· 2007-06-21· cited 15×
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.