Wilfong v. Commonwealth’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

21 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 22 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “it is a legitimate concern that exposure to sexually-arousing or sexually-orientated materials may contribute to sexual deviancy or the possibility of future sexually-abusive behavior,”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Diorec v. State · People v. Lientz

2. “[R]educing access to [obscene, pornographic or sexually stimulating] materials furthers the goals of rehabilitation, deterrence, and public safety in connection with sexual offenders.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. People v. Lientz · 946 So. 2d 1155 - Kasischke v. State

3. “When, as now, a court order is read to proscribe conduct that is not in itself unlawful, the dictates of due process forbid the forfeiture of an actor's liberty by reason of such conduct unless he is given fair warning. Nevertheless, the fair warning doctrine does not provide a safe harbor for probationers who choose to ignore the obvious. Furthermore, though a probationer is entitled to notice of what behavior will result in a violation, so that he may guide his actions accordingly, fair warning is not to be confused with the fullest, or most pertinacious, warning imaginable. Conditions of probation do not have to be cast in letters six feet high, or to describe every possible permutation, or to spell out every last, self-evident detail. Conditions of probation may afford fair warning even if they are not precise to the point of pedantry. In short, conditions of probation can be written — and must be read — in a commonsense way.”

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