Elliott v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1998
Citation profile
10 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2511 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986)
Relies on Chapman v. State of California · Miller v. State · Thompson v. State · Baumgarner v. State · Houston v. State
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 10 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“the search and seizure clauses are restraints upon the government and its agents, not upon private individuals; the corollary to this proposition is that the exclusionary rule is not intended as a restraint upon the acts of private individuals.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. King v. State“thus removing one of the constitutional benefits afforded all criminal defendants in a criminal case a right to a fair and impartial jury.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Saul v. State“does not proscribe the admissibility of an unlawful recording.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. King v. State
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.