273 N.J. Super. 147 - State v. Worthy’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 state decisions

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

1. “[a]ny person acting at the direction of an investigative or law enforcement officer to intercept a váre, electronic or oral communication, where such person is a party to the communication or one of the parties to the communication has given prior consent to such interception; provided, however, that no such interception shall be made unless the Attorney General or his designee or a county prosecutor within his authority determines that there exists a reasonable suspicion that evidence of criminal conduct will be derived from such interception; [N.J.S.A. 2A:156A-4c.]”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Worthy

2. “[i]n this case, there is no involvement by law enforcement agents of other jurisdictions. Skinner was taping the conversations at the request of a New Jersey investigator, concerning a crime being committed in New Jersey and for the purpose of prosecution in New Jersey. The State concedes that DiGiorgio was an “investigative or law enforcement officer” as defined by N.J.S.A. 2A:156A-2f. Thus, his conduct is governed by the New Jersey wiretap law. [ 273 N.J.Super. at 154 , 641 A.2d 282 .]”

   1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
   e.g. State v. Worthy