State v. Cosmo’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

6 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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “[A] solicitation [or enticement] of another may be made by communication with a third party. Just as solicitation of prostitution can be made through a third party pimp, solicitation of a child to commit the acts prohibited by OCGA § 16-12-100.2 (d) (1) may be conducted through an adult intermediary who is believed to be in a position of trust or authority with respect to the child. As the Eleventh Circuit Court stated in [United States v.] Murrell, [ 13 ] “the efficacy of [the statute] would be eviscerated if a defendant could circumvent [the statute] simply by employing an intermediary to carry out his intended objective.” 14”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. Young v. State · 332 Ga. App. 453 - Schlesselman v. the State

2. ““[Ga.Code Ann.,] § 16-12-100.2(d)(l) makes the attempt to do certain prohibited acts cine of the ways in which the statute may be violated.’ In construing the element of attempt within this statute, we look to [Ga.Code Ann.,] § 16-4-1, the statute that defines criminal attempt as a separate offense: ‘A person . commits the offense of criminal attempt when, .with intent to commit a specific . crime, he performs any act which constitutes a substantial step toward the comr mission of that crime.’ Thus, attempt within ■ [Ga.Code Ann.,] § 16 — 12— 100.2(d)(1) involves two elements: intent to commit a crime (in this case, intent to solicit a child for an unlawful sexual offense), and the taking of a substantial step toward the commission of that crime (in this case, a substantial step toward soliciting a child for that unlawful offense). Communication with a person the defendant believes to be the parent of a child who is the object of the defendant’s attempt to solicit satisfies the intent element of the offense.””

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

3. “It shall be unlawful for any person intentionally or willfully to utilize a computer on-line service or Internet service, including but not limited to a local bulletin board service, Internet chat room, e-mail, on-line messaging service, or other electronic device, to seduce, solicit, lure, or entice, or attempt to seduce, solicit, lure, or entice a child or another person believed by such person to be a child to commit any illegal act described in... Code Section 16-6-4, relating to the offense of child molestation or aggravated child molestation[.]”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 332 Ga. App. 453 - Schlesselman v. the State