Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 180 Md. 279 - Leon v. State

Leon v. State’s Empirical Analysis

1942

Citation profile

65
cited by 65 later decisions
2
cited 2 times by the Supreme Court
5
states following
December 2013
most recently cited

2 district · 61 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 65 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently December 2013 · most notably Schwartz v. Texas (1952), Shelton v. State (2001)

2 district · 61 state decisions

28019421950196019701980199020002010decided

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 47 U.S.C. § 605

Relies on Nardone v. United States · Olmstead v. United States · Ex parte Jackson · Nardone v. United States · Albert Adams v. People of the State of 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 65 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

  1. ““* * * if a statute makes it a criminal offense to do any one of several acts, which are mentioned disjunctively, an indictment based upon the statute may charge in a single count that the defendant did as many of the forbidden things as the pleader chooses to include, using the conjunction ‘and’ where the word ‘or’ is used in the statute, and the count will not be void for duplicity, but the particular offense may be established at the trial of the case by proof of any one of the acts, * *”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
  2. ““However, in view of the decision in the Olmstead case we hold that evidence procured by wire tapping is not prohibited in the State courts, either by the Federal Constitution or by the Federal Communications Act. It is true that it is a criminal offense in Maryland, as in most other states, for any person connected with a telegraph or telephone company to divulge the contents or nature of any message. . . . But evidence obtained by means of wire tapping is not made inadmissible.””
    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.