Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 322 F. Supp. 4 - Severson v. Duff

322 F. Supp. 4 - Severson v. Duff’s Empirical Analysis

1970

Citation profile

29
cited by 29 later decisions
1
states following
September 2004
most recently cited

19 federal appellate · 1 district · 4 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 29 later decisions — most recently September 2004 · most notably United States v. Linn (1975), 339 So. 2d 641 - State v. Saunders (1976)

19 federal appellate · 1 district · 4 state decisions

2101970198019902000decided

Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.

Relationships

Applies 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996) · 28 U.S.C. § 2254 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)

Relies on Connally v. General Construction Co. · National Association for Advancement of Colored People v. Y Button · National Association for Advancement of Colored People v. State of Alabama Patterson · Hague v. Committee for Industrial Organization · Thornhill v. Alabama

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

  1. “"Whoever commits such acts as are of a nature to corrupt the public morals, or outrage the sense of public decency, or affect the peace and quiet of persons who may witness them, or engages in brawling or fighting, or engages in such conduct as to constitute a breach of the peace or disorderly conduct, shall be guilty of a misdemeanor of the second degree, punishable as provided in § 775.082 or § 775.083."”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““In order to comport with fundamental concepts of fairness, a statute or a charge must be phrased in terms sufficiently definite so that men of common intelligence will not have to guess at its meaning and application. Connally v. General Construction Co., 269 U.S. 385, 391 , 46 S.Ct. 126 , 70 L.Ed. 322 (1926).” Ibid.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  3. “suffer[ed] from the constitutional defect of vagueness”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority

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.