State v. Mauer’s Empirical Analysis
2007
Citation profile
2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
November 2010
most recently cited
1 federal appellate · 1 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2252
Relies on Dombrowski v. Pfister · New York v. Ferber · Stanley v. Georgia · Smith v. People of the State of California · Ginsberg v. New York
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.
“In light of * * * First Amendment concerns that apply to child pornography, we conclude that Minn.Stat. § 617.247, subd. 4(a), should be * * * interpreted to require that the possessor be “in some manner aware” that the performer is a minor. The “in some manner aware” standard is substantially similar, if not equivalent, to the recklessness standard approved in Osborne . In this context, a person has “reason to know” only if he has knowledge of facts that subjectively lead him to believe that the performer is a child.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Mauer
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.