Brown v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1977
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 22 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 24 later decisions — most recently September 2001
1 federal appellate · 22 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
Relies on 70 Cal. 2d 522 - People v. Ireland · Lanza v. State of New York · 68 Cal. 2d 714 - People v. Fioritto · 5 Cal. App. 3d 476 - People v. Califano · 262 Cal. App. 2d 350 - People v. Chandler
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 24 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“Once a person has been taken into custody by law enforcement authorities, his right to privacy has been effectively diminished, and he has no reasonable expectation of privacy.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passagee.g. K.F. v. State · KF v. State“It appears to be the general rule that a prisoner in jail has no reasonable expectation of privacy and that the custodians of such a detention center have the right to exercise constant surveillance of inmates, including eavesdropping on their conversations. This rule has been held to include electronic surveillance while a person is under detention in a police building and not yet formally imprisoned. The question at hand is whether the rule applies to arrested persons confined in a police vehicle; we think it does. Once a person is taken into custody by law enforcement authorities, his right to privacy has been effectively diminished, and he has no reasonable expectation that his conversation will be private.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Lucero“any communication uttered by a person exhibiting an expectation that such communication is not subject to interception under circumstances justifying such expectation.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. KF 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.