632 So. 2d 623 - Mozo v. State’s Empirical Analysis
1994
Citation profile
1 federal appellate · 9 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2510 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986)
Relies on Katz v. United States · Roe v. Wade · Griswold v. State of Connecticut · Alderman v. United States · Olmstead v. 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 13 citing decisions cite the case generally; a passage count includes only decisions quoting that exact language verbatim.
“[A]ny oral communication uttered by a person exhibiting an expectation that such communication is not subject to interception under circumstances justifying such expectation and does not mean any public oral communication uttered at a public meeting or any electronic communication.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“Every natural person has the right to be let alone and free from governmental intrusion into his private life except as otherwise provided herein.”
2 later decisions quote this exact passage · from the concurrence“This cordless telephone system operates on the part 1568 FCC Rules. Privacy of communication may not be insured when using this phone. Operation is subject to two conditions: 1. it may not interfere with radio communications. 2. it must accept any interference received including that which may cause undesirable operation. Complies with parts 1568 FCC Rules, FCC registration number.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Mozo
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.