In Re Kyle M.’s Empirical Analysis
2001
Citation profile
13 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 871 (Presidential Threat Protection Act of 2000)
Relies on Rav v. City of St Paul Minnesota · Watts v. United States · Madsen v. Women's Health Center, Inc. · Hayes v. Continental Insurance · United States v. Orozco-Santillan
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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[I]n order for the government to establish a “true threat” it must demonstrate that the defendant made a statement in a context or under such circumstances wherein a reasonable person would foresee that the statement would be interpreted by those to whom the maker communicates the statement as a serious expression of an intention to inflict bodily harm upon or to take the life of [a person].”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. In Re Ryan A.“A person commits threatening or intimidating if such person threatens or intimidates by word or conduct: To cause physical injury to another person or serious damage to the property of another.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. In Re Ryan A.“would mean that the legislature's amendment . . . was purely formal, without substantive significance or practical effect,”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
How this case has been treated — in progress
Whether each later court followed, distinguished, criticized, or overruled this decision. The treatment classification (task #35) runs highest-cited cases first and lights up here as it reaches this one.