331 Pa. Super. 107 - Commonwealth v. Croll’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

35 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 35 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “"It is clear to us, and we therefore hold, that Art. I, § 7 of the Pennsylvania Constitution affords no greater protection from prosecution for the distribution and sale of obscene materials than do the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution." 480 A.2d at 269 .”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. Marshall · 338 Pa. Super. 309 - Commonwealth v. Hulehan

2. “"Appellant concedes that the Pennsylvania Act was amended `with slavish adherence to' the decision of the United States Supreme Court in Miller v. California, 413 U.S. 15 , 93 S.Ct. 2607 , 37 L.Ed.2d 419 , rehearing denied, 414 U.S. 881 , 94 S.Ct. 26, 38 L.Ed.2d 128 (1973). In spite of that, he argues that `obscenity is impossible of definition' and that we should, therefore, `set a higher standard for the State of Pennsylvania in obscenity criminal matters.'" 480 A.2d at 269 .”

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

3. “"It follows therefrom that there is in Pennsylvania no fundamental right to protection from prosecution for the publication of matter abusive of the right of free expression, viz. obscene matter. In short, obscenity does not enjoy the full protection of Art. I, § 7 of the Pennsylvania Constitution of 1874." 440 A.2d at 526, 527 .”

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