Dyson v. Stein’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

237 federal appellate · 51 district · 16 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 520 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “flagrantly and patently violative of express constitutional prohibitions in every clause, sentence and paragraph, and in whatever manner and against whomever an effort might be made to apply it.”

   6 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Mitchum v. Foster · Kugler v. Helfant

2. ““(b) Obscene Defined; Method of Adjudication. — A thing is obscene if considered as a whole its predominant appeal is to the prurient interest, i.e., a shameful or morbid interest in nudity, sex or excretion, and if it goes substantially beyond customary limits of candor in description or presentation of such matters. A thing is obscene if its obscenity is latent, as in the case of undeveloped photographs. Obscenity shall be judged with reference to ordinary adults, except that it shall be judged with reference to children or other especially susceptible audience if it appears from the character of the material or the circumstances of its dissemination to be especially designed for or directed to such an audience. In any prosecution for an offense under this section, evidence shall be admissible to show: (1) The character of the audience for which the material was designed or to which it was directed; (2) What the predominant appeal of the material would be for ordinary adults or a special audience, and what effect, if any, it would probably have on the behavior of such people; (3) Artistic, literary, scientific, educational or other merits of the material; (4) The degree of public acceptance of the material throughout the United States; (5) Appeal to prurient interest, or absence thereof, in advertising or to the promotion of the material. Expert testimony and testimony of the author, creator or publisher relating to factors entering into the determination of the issue of ob”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. 11 N.C. App. 11 - State v. McCluney

3. “The special circumstances when federal intervention in a state criminal proceeding is permissible are not restricted to bad faith on the part of state officials or the threat of multiple prosecutions. They also exist where for any reason the state statute being enforced is unconstitutional on its face.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Shaw v. Garrison