Kramer v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1980
Citation profile
11
cited by 11 later decisions
3
states following
July 2004
most recently cited
3 federal appellate · 8 state decisions
Relationships
Relies on Burks v. United States · Connally v. General Construction Co. · Chaplinsky v. State of New Hampshire · Zwickler v. Koota · Cohen v. California
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 11 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“(a) A person commits an offense if he intentionally: (1) communicates by telephone or in writing in vulgar, profane, obscene, or indecent language or in a coarse and offensive manner and by this action intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly annoys or alarms the recipient or intends to annoy or alarm the recipient;”
4 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Kramer v. Price · Campbell v. State““Under this provision of the harassment statute the elements the State must prove are (1) a person (2) intentionally (3) communicates (by telephone or writing) (4)(a) in vulgar, profane, obscene, or indecent language or (b) in a coarse and offensive manner and by such action (5)(a) intentionally, knowingly, or recklessly annoys or alarms the recipient or (b) intends to annoy or alarm the recipient.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Campbell v. State“recognize the interest of the State in protecting the recipient's privacy within the house;”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Koetting
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.