148 Misc. 2d 103 - People v. Johnson’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

10 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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Defendant contends that this case does not involve the use of a computer but rather use of a telephone. Further, defendant advances the argument that were a computer violation charge to be sustained here, other prosecutions of patent absurdity would follow, such as using without authorization a washing machine that is equipped with a computerized timer. Defendant’s position is ill taken. The instrumentality at issue here is not merely a telephone, as defendant asserts, but rather a telephone inextricably linked to a sophisticated computerized communication system.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 2002 Pa. Super. 96 - Commonwealth v. Delapaz · State v. Rowell