Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 2005 SD 48 - State v. Loveland

State v. Loveland’s Empirical Analysis

2005

Citation profile

3
cited by 3 later decisions
3
states following
July 2019
most recently cited

3 state decisions

Relationships

Relies on Katz v. United States · Coolidge v. New Hampshire · Sedillo v. United States · United States v. Jacobsen · Skinner v. Railway Labor Executives' Assn.

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

  1. “Once a urine sample is properly seized, the individual that provided the sample has no legitimate or reasonable expectation that the presence of illegal substances in that sample will remain private.”
    2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. “After the urine sample was seized by the police, testing the sample for the presence of illegal substances required no further seizure of [the defendant's] person or effects.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “chemical analysis ... of blood[ ] can reveal a host of private medical facts about an [individual].”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.