State v. T.E.C.’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

7 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 7 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “4. In the sexual deviancy evaluation, [Dr.] Knoepfler concludes that the respondent presents a moderate to high risk to the community based on the following risk factors: sexual abuse of younger, vulnerable children, including his brother and neighbors; varying degrees of force was used in an effort to get one victim to comply with his sexual demands; the respondent has a long history of difficulty making and keeping friends; the respondent has a long history of school problems; the respondent violated his conditions of release by viewing pornography and not keeping his mother informed as to his whereabouts; the respondent's mother did not appear to be able to provide the level of supervision required to ensure that the community remained safe; the respondent has a history of using marijuana; and the respondent is impulsive. 5. In the sexual deviancy evaluation, [Dr.] Knoepfler concludes that due to the large number of problems the respondent faces, he should complete 104 weeks of specialized sex offender treatment with a minimum of one year of his treatment occurring in a structured live-in program before considering a transition to a less restrictive setting. 6. The Court adopted [Dr.] Knoepfler's factors for finding the respondent a moderate to high risk and specifically noted: the respondent lacked self-control, remorse and empathy, used force to gain victim compliance, abused younger more vulnerable children, has cognitive problems as well as difficulty with school, does”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. TEC

2. “(3) When a juvenile offender is found to have committed a sex offense ... the court, on its own motion or the motion of the state or the respondent, may order an examination to determine whether the respondent is amenable to treatment. . . . . The examiner shall assess and report regarding the respondent's amenability to treatment and relative risk to the community. A proposed treatment plan shall be provided and shall include, at a minimum: (a)(i) Frequency and type of contact between the offender and therapist; (ii) Specific issues to be addressed in the treatment and description of planned treatment modalities; (iii) Monitoring plans, including any requirements regarding living conditions, lifestyle requirements, and monitoring by family members, legal guardians, or others; (iv) Anticipated length of treatment; and (v) Recommended crime-related prohibitions. . . . . (b)(ii) Undergo available outpatient sex offender treatment for up to two years or inpatient sex offender treatment not to exceed the standard range of confinement for that offense.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. TEC

3. “If the offender violates any condition of the disposition or the court finds that the respondent is failing to make satisfactory progress in treatment, the court may revoke the suspension and order execution of the disposition or the court may impose a penalty of up to thirty days' confinement for violating conditions of the disposition. The court may order both execution of the disposition and up to thirty days' confinement for the violation of the conditions of the disposition. The court shall give credit for any confinement time previously served if that confinement was for the offense for which the suspension is being revoked.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. TEC