Williams v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1973
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 4 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2510 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 2515 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 2518 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986)
Relies on Katz v. United States · Mapp v. Ohio · Rathbun v. United States · Carbo v. United States · State v. Carbone
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 5 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
““. . . there was no tap on the line or interference with the normal telephone lines . . . The motel manager . . merely recorded that which he, as the proper party to the telephone line, could hear.””
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. Pearson 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.