Skip to main content

Jones v. State

Citations

  • 10 S.W.3d 449
  • 340 Ark. 390
  • 2000 Ark. LEXIS 68

How courts have described this case

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

  • holding that the appellant’s argument was barred because he did not object to the introduction of certain character evidence until after two witnesses had already so testified
  • holding that the appellant's argument was barred because he did not object to the introduction of certain character evidence until after two witnesses had already so testified
  • holding that the defendant’s argument was barred because he did not object to the introduction of certain character evidence until after two witnesses had already so testified
  • affirming denial of motion for mistrial where State allegedly improperly commented on defendant’s right to not testify, but defendant opened the door to the State’s doing so
  • “We have frequently held that a contemporaneous objection must be made to the trial court before we will review an alleged error on appeal.”
  • “Because the defense was unable to show that the cocaine use prompted the killing, the trial court did not err in ruling that the probative value of the evidence was far outweighed by its prejudicial nature.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Tom Glaze

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Cited by

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

Cites

16 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

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.