7 canonical passages across 4 cases, quoted by 29 opinions in total. These passages cluster together because the same opinions keep quoting them side by side — they state parts of one doctrine. The anchor passage is from People v. Gonzales.
| # | Case | Flag | Canonical passage | Citers |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | People v. Gonzales Anchor | green | “although over 40 years have elapsed since our decision in lifschutz, the united states supreme court itself has not yet definitively determined whether the federal constitution embodies even a general right of informational privacy.” | 5 |
| 2 | People v. Stritzinger | green | “the psychotherapist-patient privilege has been recognized as an aspect of the patient's constitutional right to privacy.” | 5 |
| 3 | People v. Gonzales | green | “the federal constitution grants states considerable leeway to impose very substantial limitations on the right of privacy retained by persons who are released on parole,” | 4 |
| 4 | In Re Lifschutz | green | “concomitant with the purposes of the exception.” | 4 |
| 5 | People v. Stritzinger | green | “any psychotherapist-patient privilege,” | 4 |
| 6 | Maldonado v. Superior Court | green | “in a criminal proceeding against the person who gave them.” | 3 |
A red or yellow flag on a member means the underlying case has negative treatment — for those, check the case page before relying on the passage.