United States v. Clark’s Empirical Analysis
22 F.3d 799 · 1994
Citation profile
10 federal appellate · 2 district · 20 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 34 later decisions — most recently March 2019 · most notably United States v. Dunbar (2009), Campos v. State (2008)
10 federal appellate · 2 district · 20 state decisions — followed in 14 states
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. § 2510 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 21 U.S.C. § 841 (§ 401 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Katz v. United States · National Union Fire Insurance v. Helfand · Hughey v. United States · Begier v. Internal Revenue Service · Ingalls v. Roosevelt County
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 34 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“A marked police car is owned and operated by the state for the express purpose of ferreting out crime. It is essentially the trooper’s office, and is frequently used as a temporary jail for housing and transporting arrestees and suspects. The general public has no reason to frequent the back seat of a patrol car, or to believe that it is a sanctuary for private discussions. A police car is not the kind of public place, like a phone booth where a person should be able to reasonably expect that his conversation will not be monitored. In other words, allowing police to record statements made by individuals seated inside a patrol car does not intrude upon privacy and freedom to such an extent that it could be regarded as inconsistent with the aims of a free and open society.”
4 later decisions quote this exact passage“A marked police car is owned and operated by the state for the express purpose of ferreting out crime. It is essentially the trooper’s office, and is frequently used as a temporary jail for housing and transporting arres-tees and suspects. The general public has no reason to frequent the back seat of a patrol car, or to believe that it is a sanctuary for private discussions. A police car is not the kind of public place, like a phone booth, where a person should be able to reasonably expect that his conversation will not be monitored.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage“The general public has no reason to frequent the back seat of a patrol car, or to believe that it is a sanctuary for private discussion.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Ramirez
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.