Maloney v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2009
Citation profile
20 state decisions
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Texas 56th Judicial District Court)
Relationships
Relies on Jackson v. Virginia · Broadrick v. Oklahoma · Hoffman Estates v. Flipside, Hoffman Estates, Inc. · New York v. Ferber · Members of the City Council of Los Angeles v. Taxpayers for Vincent
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 20 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(c) A person commits an offense if the person, over the Internet, by electronic mail or text message or other electronic message service or system, or through a commercial online service, knowingly solicits a minor to meet another person, including the actor, with the intent that th'e minor will engage in sexual contact, sexual intercourse, or deviate sexual intercourse with the actor or another person.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“(d) It is not a defense to prosecution under Subsection (c) that: (1) the meeting did not occur; (2) the actor did not intend for the meeting to occur; or (3) the actor was engaged in a fantasy at the time of commission of the offense.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage“The prevention of sexual exploitation and abuse of childi-en addressed by the Texas online solicitation of a minor statute constitutes a government objective ■ of surpassing importance_ [T]he incidence of the State seeking to prosecute two consenting adults engaging in online . role playing or “fantasy” would likely.be exceedingly low. Considering the overly broad scope and purpose of section 33.021, we have been given no basis to believe that prosecutions of consenting adults engaging in .role-playing would amount to any more than a “tiny fraction” of all prosecutions under the statute. In sum, the overbreadth of ‘ Penal Code section 33.021 is not substantial when judged in relation “to its plainly legitimate sweep.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Paquette
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.