104 So. 3d 1069 - State v. Catalano’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 federal appellate · 36 state decisions

Most-quoted passages

The sentences later courts lift from this opinion, ranked by how many decisions quote each — the parts of the opinion doing the work. These counts are smaller than the citation total above because most of the 40 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The doctrine of overbreadth permits an individual whose own speech or conduct may be prohibited to challenge an enactment facially because it also threatens others not before the court — those who desire to engage in legally protected expression but who may refrain from doing so rather than risk prosecution or undertake to have the law declared partially invalid. In other words, the issue of overbreadth is one of the few exceptions to the traditional rules that courts will not consider factual questions beyond the scope of the case at hand. Hypothetical consequences are considered in the case of allegedly overbroad statutes precisely because this is the only way to give effect to the constitutional right of free speech. [[Image here]] It is said, however, that in the arena of free speech and expression, the over-breadth doctrine is an unusual remedy which is to be used sparingly, particularly where the challenged statute is primarily meant to regulate conduct and not merely pure speech.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
   e.g. Kenneth Isaac Parkerson v. State of Florida

2. “in a vagueness challenge, any doubt as to a statute's validity should be resolved in favor of the citizen and against the State.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. STATE OF FLORIDA v. WILLIAM CRUMBLEY

3. “A court's decision regarding the constitutionality of a statute is reviewed de novo as it presents a pure question of law.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. STATE OF FLORIDA v. WILLIAM CRUMBLEY