State v. Perkins’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

17 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 18 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. ““[T]he First Amendment protects a significant amount of verbal criticism and challenge directed at police officers.” City of Houston v. Hill, 482 U.S. 451, 461 , 107 S.Ct. 2502, 2505 , 96 L.Ed.2d 398, 412 (1987). The State may not punish a person for voicing an objection to a police officer where no “fighting words” are used. Norwell v. Cincinnati, 414 U.S. 14 , 94 S.Ct. 187 , 38 L.Ed.2d 170 (1973). To punish only spoken words addressed to a police officer, a statute must be limited in scope to fighting words that “by their very utterance inflict injury or tend to incite an immediate breach of the peace.” Hill, 482 U.S. at 461-62 , 107 S.Ct. at 2509-10 , 96 L.Ed.2d at 412 (quoting Lewis v. City of New Orleans, 415 U.S. 130 , 94 S.Ct. 970 , 39 L.Ed.2d 214 (1974)). As further noted by the United States Supreme Court, the “fighting words” exception may require narrow application in cases involving words addressed to a police officer “because a properly trained officer may reasonably be expected to exercise a higher degree of restraint than the average citizen.” Hill, 482 U.S. at 462 , 107 S.Ct. at 2510 , 96 L.Ed.2d at 412 . As stated by the high court: The freedom of individuals verbally to oppose or challenge police action without thereby risking arrest is one of the principal characteristics by which we distinguish a free nation from a police state. Id. at 462-63 , 107 S.Ct. at 2510 , 96 L.Ed.2d at 412-13 .”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Bailey · State v. Pittman

2. “Any person who shall (a) be found on any highway or at any public place or public gathering in a grossly intoxicated condition or otherwise conducting himself in a disorderly or boisterous manner, (b) use obscene or profane language on any highway or at any public place or gathering or in hearing distance of any schoolhouse or church ... shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor....”

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