Marlett v. State’s Empirical Analysis
2007
Citation profile
13 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 42 U.S.C. § 14071 (§ 170101 of the Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act of 1994)
Relies on Anglemyer v. State · Connecticut Department of Public Safety v. Doe · Rutherford v. State · Buchanan v. State · 364 Ill. App. 3d 822 - In Re Phillip C.
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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“a person who suffers from a mental abnormality or personality disorder that . makes the individual likely to repeatedly commit a sex offense.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. Baugh v. State · Edwards v. State“[A] number of courts from other jurisdictions have addressed whether it violates substantive due process to require a person to be placed on an offender registry for committing the equivalent of criminal confinement of a minor, which is the gist of Marlett’s claim. In order to conform with substantive due process, a law that does not impact a fundamental right must only bear a rational relationship to a legitimate state interest. See Mitchell v. State, 659 N.E.2d 112, 116 (Ind.1995). Almost all courts that have addressed registration issues have found no fundamental right that is impacted by an offender registry. See, e.g., People v. Cintron, 13 Misc.3d 833 , 827 N.Y.S.2d 445 , 452 (N.Y.Sup.Ct.2006). Thus, they have reviewed substantive due process claims regarding offender registries under the rational relationship test. See id. at 453 . Several courts have found requiring a defendant to be placed on an offender registry for committing the equivalent of criminal confinement of a minor to meet this rationality test. See, e.g., id. at 460; In re Phillip C., 364 Ill.App.3d 822 , 301 Ill. Dec. 791 , 847 N.E.2d 801, 808 (2006), appeal denied. Marlett has not persuaded us to reject these holdings, particularly in light of the fact that Indiana’s Registry now includes “violent” as well as “sex” offenses.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“; and that the trial court's sexually violent predator determination must be based on a consideration of the experts'”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Baugh v. State
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.