State v. Letalien’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 federal appellate · 2 district · 24 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 33 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “The fact that the Act uses past crime as the touchstone, probably sweeping in a significant number of people who pose no real threat to the community, serves to feed suspicion that something more than regulation of safety is going on; when a legislature uses prior convictions to impose burdens that outpace the law’s stated civil - aims, there is room for serious argument that the ulterior purpose is to revisit past crimes, not prevent future ones.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Millard v. Rankin · Doe v. State

2. “impose[d] an ex post facto punishment as to offenders sentenced in the years before the effective date of SORNA of 1999 for whom registration was a required part of their sentence and who were subsequently made subject to the more burdensome requirements of SOR-NA of 1999 after its effective date of September 18,1999.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. John Doe I v. Robert Williams

3. “does not allow for a waiver of its requirements, nor does it condition an offender’s duty to register or verify on an individualized determination of the offender’s risk of re-offending; rather, its requirements are mandatory and attach strictly as a consequence of the conviction of a crime identified by the statute.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 224 Md. App. 668 - In Re NICK H.