United States v. Vasconcellos’s Empirical Analysis
2009
Citation profile
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2510 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 2516 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 2518 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 3500 · 21 U.S.C. § 846 (§ 406 of the Controlled Substances Act)
Relies on Brady v. State of Maryland · Erie Co v. Tompkins · Illinois v. Gates · Bruton v. United States · United States v. Leon
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.
“[It] will permit further motions only for good cause shown should future developments produce new material facts and issues.' They will be rejected if they rehash issues, or if they are based on facts and legal arguments which, through the exercise of due diligence, could have been included in the current motions. The court will apply this discretionary standard to future motions.”
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.