925 F. Supp. 2d 1265 - Windwalker v. Bentley’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

1 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. ““Mr. Windwalker’s efforts to challenge the ASORCNA on an ex post facto basis are similarly unavailing in light of the Supreme Court’s guidance in Smith v. Doe, 538 U.S. 84 , 123 S.Ct. 1140 , 155 L.Ed.2d 164 (2003). As a general rule, a law. may constitute an ex post facto viola- • tion if it is intended to impose aretroac- ■ Uve punishment or, if it has the effect of transforming ‘a[n] otherwise civil remedy’ into ‘a criminal penalty.’ Id. at 92 , 123 S.Ct. at 1146 -47 (quoting Hudson v. United States, 522 U.S. 93, 100 , 118 S.Ct. 488 , 139 L.Ed.2d 450 (1997)). [[Image here]] “Here, the stated purpose of the ■ASORCNA is undoubtedly civil in nature and Mr. Windwalker has not alleged any facts that would support an ex ■' post facto effects claim consistent with Smith. See id. at 97, 123 S.Ct. at 1149 (‘The factors most relevant to our analysis are whether, in its necessary operation, the regulatory scheme: has been regarded in our history and traditions as a punishment; imposes an affirmative disability or restraint; promotes the traditional aims of punishment; has a rational connection to a nonpunitive purpose; or is excessive with respect to this purpose.’). Thus, from a pleadings standpoint, Mr. Windwalker’s ex post facto claim fails.””

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Biddle