Commonwealth v. Dingle’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

9 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 9 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “Whoever, either with knowledge that a person is a child under eighteen years of age or while in possession of such facts that he should have reason to know that such person is a child under eighteen years of age, hires, coerces, solicits or entices, employs, procures, uses, causes, encourages, or knowingly permits such child to participate or engage in any act that depicts, describes, or represents sexual conduct for the purpose of representation or reproduction in any visual material, or to engage in any live performance involving sexual conduct, shall be punished ... " (emphasis added). General Laws c. 272, § 29C, provides, in pertinent part: "Whoever knowingly purchases or possesses a ... photograph or other similar visual reproduction, or depiction by computer, of any child whom the person knows or reasonably should know to be under the age of 18 years of age and such child is: ... "(vii) depicted or portrayed in any pose, posture or setting involving a lewd exhibition of the unclothed genitals, pubic area, buttocks or, if such person is female, a fully or partially developed breast of the child; with knowledge of the nature or content thereof shall be punished ...”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 94 Mass. App. Ct. 613 - Commonwealth v. Casbohm

2. “[quotation omitted] ). Accordingly, it was not inappropriate to convict the defendant on the two indictments -- one under § 29A ( a ), and one under § 29A ( b ). The defendant's citation to Dingle , supra , also fails to assist him. In Dingle , the defendant was charged with three counts of possession with intent to distribute child pornography in violation of G. L. c. 272, § 29B, and with two counts of distributing child pornography , also in violation of § 29B. The indictments recited that the defendant had committed the offense”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 94 Mass. App. Ct. 613 - Commonwealth v. Casbohm

3. “[t]he defendant argue[d] that the indictments charge[d] two crimes in the alternative and thus [were] ambiguous, duplicative, and violate[d] art. 12 of the Massachusetts Declaration of Rights and the United States Constitution. His argument rest[ed] on his premise that, because paragraph ( a ) of G. L. c. 272, § 29B, pertains to materials depicting children in a state of nudity, and paragraph ( b ) pertains to materials depicting children engaged in sexual conduct, there are two separate crimes that must be charged separately.”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage
   e.g. 94 Mass. App. Ct. 613 - Commonwealth v. Casbohm