Commonwealth v. Connolly’s Empirical Analysis

Citation profile

8 federal appellate · 2 district · 72 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 84 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.

1. “a warrant was required here because the initial installation of the particular device clearly constituted a seizure under art. 14. The installation required not only entry by the police into the minivan for one hour, but also operation of the vehicle’s electrical system, in order to attach the device to the vehicle’s power source and to verify that it was operating properly. Moreover, operation of the device required power from the defendant’s vehicle, an ongoing physical intrusion.”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Commonwealth v. Almonor · 57 Va. App. 68 - Foltz v. Commonwealth

2. ““[Wjarrants for GPS monitoring of a vehicle may be issued under the courts’ common-law authority, in circumstances . . . where [there is] probable cause to believe that a particularly described offense has been, is being, or is about to be committed, and that GPS monitoring of the vehicle will produce evidence of such offense or will aid in the apprehension of a person who the applicant has probable cause to believe has committed, is committing, or is about to commit such offense.””

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Commonwealth v. Rousseau · Commonwealth v. Vasquez

3. “In fact, the appropriate constitutional concern is not the protection of property but rather the protection of the reasonable expectation of privacy”

   2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
   e.g. Commonwealth v. Almonor · Commonwealth v. Fredericq