142 F. Supp. 2d 1215 - Johnson v. Nelson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 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. “Hendricks found that Kansas’[s] statutory scheme provided sufficient due process protections for a person subject to civil commitment, in part because “proper procedur[al] and evidentiary standards” were present. Hendricks, 521 U.S. at 356-57, 360 , 117 S.Ct. 2072 []. Again, the California Supreme Court has found that California’s SVP Act is nearly identical to the statute upheld in Hendricks , and Petitioner has provided this Court with no basis for disturbing that decision. See Hubbart, 19 Cal.4th at 1138, 1157 , 81 Cal.Rptr.2d 492 , 969 P.2d 584 [ ]. Thus, California’s SVP Act similarly provides sufficient procedural due process protections ....”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 242 F. Supp. 2d 695 - Woodard v. Mayberg

2. “(d) An application for a writ of habeas corpus on behalf of a person in custody pursuant to the judgment of a State court shall not be granted with respect to any claim that was adjudicated on the merits in State court proceedings unless the adjudication of the claim— (1) resulted in a decision that was contrary to, or involved an unreasonable application of, clearly established Federal law, as determined by the Supreme Court of the United States; or (2) resulted in a decision that was based on an unreasonable determination of the facts in light of the evidence presented in the State court proceeding.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 345 F. Supp. 2d 1065 - Pena v. Giurbino

3. “clearly has a valid compelling interest in protecting its citizens from sexually violent predators and in identifying these individuals prior to their release from custody so that they may be subjected to civil commitment proceedings.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 831 So. 2d 172 - State v. Atkinson