State v. McKee’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

12 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 12 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “A person commits wanton neglect of a resident of a health care facility when the person knowingly acts in a manner likely to be injurious to the physical, mental or moral welfare of a resident of a health care facility_ Wanton neglect of a resident of a health care facility is a serious misdemeanor.”

   3 later decisions quote this exact passage
   e.g. State v. BILLAM-WALKER · State v. Dale

2. “The person challenging a statute carries a heavy burden of rebutting the presumption of constitutionality. If the statute can be made constitutional by a reasonable construction, the court will give it that construction. [ State v. McKee, 392 N.W.2d 493, 494 (Iowa 1986).] Thus, a statute will not be declared unconstitutional unless it clearly, palpably and without doubt, infringes the constitution. Saadiq v. State, 387 N.W.2d 315, 320 (Iowa 1986). The unconstitutional vagueness of a criminal statute must be demonstrated beyond a reasonable doubt. State v. Wagner, 410 N.W.2d 207, 214 (Iowa 1987). A statute is not unconstitutionally vague if the meaning of the words used can be fairly ascertained by reference to similar statutes, other judicial determinations, the common law, the dictionary, or the common and generally accepted meanings of the words themselves. McKee, 392 N.W.2d at 494 .”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. Matter of Kaster

3. “Vague laws offend several important values. First, because we assume that people are free to steer between lawful and unlawful conduct, we insist that laws give the person of ordinary intelligence a reasonable opportunity to know what is prohibited, so that he may act accordingly. Vague laws may trap the innocent by not providing fair warning. Second, if arbitrary and discriminatory enforcement is to be prevented, laws must provide explicit standards for those who apply them. A vague law impermissibly delegates basic policy matters to policemen, judges, and juries for resolution on an ad hoc and subjective basis, with the attendant dangers of arbitrary and discriminatory applications.”

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