Katz v. United States case brief

Katz v. United States case brief summary
389 U.S. 347 (1967)

CASE SYNOPSIS

Defendant sought review of a judgment of the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit which, in affirming defendant's conviction for transmitting wagering information by telephone in violation of 18 U.S.C.S. § 1084, rejected the contention that the recordings had been obtained in violation of the Fourth Amendment because there was no physical entrance into the area occupied by defendant.

CASE FACTS
Defendant was convicted of transmitting wagering information by telephone in violation of a federal statute. At the trial, the government was permitted, over defendant's objection, to introduce evidence of defendant's end of telephone conversations, which was overheard by FBI agents who had attached an electronic listening and recording device to the outside of the public telephone booth where he had placed his calls.

PROCEDURAL HISTORY
A court of appeals, in affirming his conviction, rejected the contention that the recordings had been obtained in violation of U.S. Constitutional Amendment IV because there was no physical entrance into the area occupied by defendant.

DISCUSSION

• The Supreme Court reversed, finding that a person in a telephone booth could rely upon the protection of U.S. Constitutional Amendment IV. 
• One who occupied a telephone booth, shut the door behind him, and paid the toll that permitted him to place a call was entitled to assume that the words he uttered into the mouthpiece would not be broadcast to the world. 
• The Court determined that the government agents ignored the procedure of antecedent justification, which was a constitutional precondition of the kind of electronic surveillance involved in the case.

CONCLUSION

The Court reversed defendant's conviction.

***

Katz v. United States (1967): Electronic listening device planted on a phone booth where D was placing illegal bets; recordings used to convict him.

·         Held: Government's activities in electronically listening to and recording the D’s words violated the privacy upon which he justifiably relied while using the telephone booth and thus constituted a 'search and seizure' within the meaning of the 4^th Amend.

·         Overrules Olmstead trespass standard.

·         "The Fourth Amendment protects people, not places."

o   Katz reasonably believed his convo in the phone booth would be private and he took steps to ensure that (shut the door, talked quietly.)

o   Focus is on Katz’s privacy, not his property

·         Harlan’s Dissent: (this is pretty much the law now)

o   First that the person have exhibited an actual (subjective) expectation of privacy, and

o   That the expectation of privacy be one that society is prepared to recognize as reasonable”

***

Recommended Supplements for Criminal Procedure
Criminal Procedure: Examples & Explanations, Sixth Edition
Emanuel Law Outline: Criminal Procedure