148 N.J. Super. 542 - State v. Murphy’s Empirical Analysis
1977
Citation profile
3 federal appellate · 2 district · 8 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 13 later decisions — most recently July 1995
3 federal appellate · 2 district · 8 state decisions
Later decisions citing this case, by decade. The current decade is in progress, and our corpus holds fewer opinions from the most recent years, so the latest bars are undercounted — not a real decline.
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2518 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986)
Relies on Starnes v. Penrod Drilling Co. · In re Kauffman Mutual Fund Actions · United States v. Donovan · Lascaris v. Shirley · Bruce v. United States
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.
“Electronic surveillance threatens to intrude upon the privacy and liberty of our citizens to such an extent that we must insist on strict compliance with the substantive and procedural safeguards established by statutory and constitutional law. [at 548]”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. In re Doe“Although N.J.S.A. 2A:156A-21 does not authorize suppression for the failure to comply with post-interception provisions, suppression may be an appropriate judicial remedy.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.