Benjamin v. State’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

2 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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “35-45-4-2 Prostitution See. 2. A person who knowingly or intentionally: (1) performs, or offers or agrees to perform, sexual intercourse or deviate sexual conduct; or (2) fondles, or offers or agrees to fondle, the genitals of another person; for money or other property commits prostitution, a Class A misdemeanor. However, the offense is a Class D felony if the person has two (2) prior convictions under this section. 35-45-4-3 Patronizing a prostitute Sec. 8. A person who knowingly or intentionally pays, or offers or agrees to pay, money or other property to another person; (1) for having engaged in, or on the understanding that the other person will engage in, sexual intercourse or deviate sexual conduct with the person or with any other person; (2) for having fondled, or on the understanding that the other person will fondle, the genitals of the person or any other person; commits patronizing a prostitute, a Class A misdemeanor. However, the offense is a Class D felony if the person has two (2) prior convictions under this section. 35-45-4-4 Promoting prostitution Sec,. 4. A person who: (1) knowingly or intentionally entices or compels another person to become a prostitute; (2) knowingly or intentionally procures, or offers or agrees to procure, a person for another person for the purpose of prostitution; (8) having control over the use of a place, knowingly or intentionally permits another person to use the place for prostitution; (4) receives money or other property from ”

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

2. “called Truog and directed him to Hartman's home, and they engaged in a sexual act. On September 20, 1991, the State filed an information and probable cause affidavit alleging that Hartman promoted prostitution. The trial court granted Hartman's motion to dismiss finding that the statute was intended to reach the conduct of a third party, and not the immediate parties to the act of prostitution. Record at 35. DISCUSSION AND DECISION Hartman was charged with violating IND.CODE § 835-45-4-4(5). This subsec tion provides that a person who”

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

3. “exclude permission granted by one also engaged in prostitution.”

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