85 Or. App. 484 - State v. Lissy’s Empirical Analysis
1987
Citation profile
2
cited by 2 later decisions
1
states following
June 1993
most recently cited
2 state decisions
Relationships
Applies 18 U.S.C. § 2510 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986) · 18 U.S.C. § 2511 (Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986)
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.
“A statement admitting guilt and implicating another person, made while in custody, may well spring from a desire to curry favor with the authorities and hence fail to qualify as being against the declarant's interest.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Nielsen“A statement tending to expose the declarant to criminal liability and offered to exculpate the accused is not admissible unless corroborating circumstances clearly indicate the trustworthiness of the statement.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Nielsen“In all criminal prosecutions, the accused shall enjoy the right * * * to be confronted with the witnesses against him * * *.”
1 later decision quote this exact passagee.g. State v. Nielsen
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.