Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist
← 452 MASS 700 - Commonwealth v. Boyarsky

Commonwealth v. Boyarsky’s Empirical Analysis

2008

Citation profile

18
cited by 18 later decisions
2
states following
August 2025
most recently cited

16 state decisions

How this case has been cited

Cited by 18 later decisions — most recently August 2025

16 state decisions

120200820102020decided

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)

Relies on Kansas v. Colorado · Commonwealth v. Sturtivant · Commonwealth v. DiGiambattista · Commonwealth v. Wilson · Commonwealth v. Wilson

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

  1. “that those responsible at the jail for recording calls had any knowledge that the initial recipient of the defendant's telephone call had passed the telephone to someone else and no evidence in any event that the jail had any power to prevent such an occurrence.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  2. “burden is initially on the defendant[ ] to demonstrate that [he] had a reasonable expectation of privacy .... Thus, if the record is unclear ... it is the defendant[ ] -- not the Commonwealth -- who [has] failed to meet [his] burden of proof ...”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence
  3. “As was true in Ennis , the absence of knowledge, power, and control on the jail's part signifies that the interception could not be deemed willful.”
    1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the concurrence

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.