Sanchez-Llamas v. Oregon’s Empirical Analysis
2006
Citation profile
134 federal appellate · 55 district · 158 state decisions
How this case has been cited
Cited by 582 later decisions (15 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 2025 · most notably Lawrence v. Florida (2007), Medellin v. Texas (2008)
134 federal appellate · 55 district · 158 state decisions — followed in 29 states
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.
Appellate journey
reviewedthe decision below (from Oregon Supreme Court)
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2515 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 3109 · 28 U.S.C. § 2255 (Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996)
Relies on Strickland v. Washington · Miranda v. State of Arizona Vignera · Brady v. State of Maryland · Bivens v. Six Unknown Named Agents of Federal Bureau of Narcotics · Williams v. Taylor
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 582 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“important interest in the finality of judgments”
40 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence““if he so requests, the competent authorities of the receiving State shall, without delay, inform the consular post of the sending State if, within its consular district, a national of that State is arrested or committed to prison or to custody pending trial or is detained in any other manner.””
4 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the majoritye.g. State v. Perez · Chi v. Quarterman“This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the dissent
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.