State v. Copes’s Empirical Analysis
2017
Citation profile
6 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2510 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 2703 (§ 201 of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 3121 (§ 301 of the Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986)
Relies on Illinois v. Gates · Katz v. United States · Schneckloth v. Bustamonte · United States v. Leon · Mapp v. Ohio
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 6 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“there may be a decision in the near future [ ( Carpenter ) ] providing authoritative guidance. ... None of this means that the analysis in Andrews is wrong.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage
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.