Watts v. State

How courts have described this case

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

• “The rule, even in criminal cases, is that, if a party has it peculiarly within his power to produce witnesses whose testimony would elucidate the transaction, the fact that he does not do it creates the presumption that the testimony, if produced, would be unfavorable.”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Cited by

6 cases in this archive cite this case.

• Arkansas State Highway Commission v. Phillips
  Supreme Court of Arkansas· 1972-03-27· cited 22×
• Cavin v. State
  Supreme Court of Arkansas· 1993-05-24· cited 16×
• Mitchell v. Stephens
  E.D. Arkansas· 1964-08-06· cited 10×
• Bell v. State
  Supreme Court of Arkansas· 1968-01-15· cited 4×
• Speed v. City of Jonesboro
  Court of Appeals of Arkansas· 1980-01-23· cited 1×
• D'Angelo Allen v. State of Arkansas
  Supreme Court of Arkansas· 2019-10-17· cited 1×

Cites

6 cases in this archive are cited by this case.

• Goldman v. United States
  Supreme Court· 1942-04-27· cited 507×
• Graves v. United States
  Supreme Court· 1893-11-06· cited 388×
• The People v. . Hovey
  New York Court of Appeals· 1883-06-05· cited 78×
• People v. Gatti
  New York Court of General Session of the Peace· 1938-04-23· cited 27×
• State v. Tabet
  West Virginia Supreme Court· 1951-10-30· cited 10×
• Hopson v. State
  Supreme Court of Arkansas· 1915-11-22· cited 8×