United States v. Grabow’s Empirical Analysis
1985
Citation profile
3 district ·
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2517 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 2518 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 21 U.S.C. § 848 (§ 408 of the Controlled Substances Act) · 26 U.S.C. § 7201
Relies on Illinois v. Gates · United States v. Leon · Franks v. Delaware · Rawlings v. Kentucky · Smith v. Maryland
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 4 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“The provisions of 18 U.S.C. § 2518 (l)(c) are not designed to force the government to exhaust all other conceivable investigative procedures before resorting to wiretapping. Rather, that section of the statute serves to insure that wiretapping is not used in situations where traditional investigative techniques would suffice to expose the crime.”
1 later decision quote this exact passage · from the majority
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.