State v. Schultz’s Empirical Analysis
1993
Citation profile
76 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 80 later decisions (2 by the Supreme Court) — most recently May 2025 · most notably State v. Schoonover (2006), State v. Thompson (2007)
76 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 12 U.S.C. § 3401 (Right to Financial Privacy Act of 1978) · 12 U.S.C. § 3405
Relies on Katz v. United States · Smith v. Maryland · Oregon v. Hass · United States v. Miller · United States v. Payner
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 80 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.”
3 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majority“"which would be admissible if made by the declarant at a hearing if ... the party and the declarant were participating in a plan to commit a crime or a civil wrong and the statement was relevant to the plan or its subject matter and was made while the plan was in existence and before its complete execution or other termination."”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Butler · State v. Swafford““The right of the people to be secure in their persons and property against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall be inviolate; and no warrant shall issue but on probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, particularly describing the place to be searched and the persons or property to be seized.””
2 later decisions 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.