185 Ill. 2d 585 - People v. Lamborn’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

4 federal appellate · 62 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 70 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"(1) whether the focal point of the visual depiction is on the child's genitals; (2) whether the setting of the visual depiction is sexually suggestive, i.e., in a place or pose generally associated with sexual activity; (3) whether the child is depicted in an unnatural pose, or in inappropriate attire, considering the age of the child; (4) whether the child is fully or partially clothed, or nude; (5) whether the visual depiction suggests sexual coyness or a willingness to engage in sexual activity; and (6) whether the visual depiction is intended or designed to elicit a sexual response in the viewer." Lamborn, 185 Ill.2d at 592 , 236 Ill.Dec. 764 , 708 N.E.2d at 354 .”

   5 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 365 Ill. App. 3d 226 - People v. Sven · 407 Ill. App. 3d 1058 - People v. Knebel

2. ““In accordance with the standards set forth in Ferber, a person commits the offense of child pornography in Illinois by photographing or possessing photographs of any child whom the person knows or reasonably should know to be under the age of 18 where such child is ‘depicted or portrayed in any pose, posture or setting involving a lewd exhibition of the unclothed genitals, pubic area, buttocks, or, if such person is female, a fully or partially developed breast of the child or other person.’ ” (Emphasis in original.) People v. Lamborn, 185 Ill. 2d 585, 590 (1999), quoting 720 ILCS 5/11— 20.1(a)(l)(vii), (a)(6) (West 1996).”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 365 Ill. App. 3d 226 - People v. Sven · United States v. Moore

3. ““We must review the photographs themselves and determine whether those photographs are lewd under the child pornography statute. We are not faced with reviewing the sufficiency of the evidence. Therefore, the de novo standard of review is the correct standard of review for this appeal.” Lamborn, 185 Ill. 2d at 590 .”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. 305 Ill. App. 3d 665 - People v. Lewis · 364 Ill. App. 3d 528 - People v. Anderson