62 F. Supp. 3d 1100 - In re [REDACTED]@Gmail.com.’s Empirical Analysis
2014
Citation profile
2 district ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 1001 (Comprehensive Thrift and Bank Fraud Prosecution and Taxpayer Recovery Act of 1990) · 18 U.S.C. § 1343 · 18 U.S.C. § 3103A · 18 U.S.C. § 371 · 18 U.S.C. § 641 (Livestock Fraud Protection Act) · 18 U.S.C. § 666
Relies on United States v. Leon · United States v. Pace · United States v. Hill · Warshak v. United States · In re the United States
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 2 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[t]he court is nevertheless unpersuaded that the particular seize first, search second [warrant] proposed here is reasonable in the Fourth Amendment sense of the word”
1 later decision quote this exact passage“At https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MeKKHxcJfh0, Google provides a very clever stop-animation description of how it says it typically responds.”
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.