1 / 8

Katz v . United States

Katz v . United States. Where and When. The case Charles Katz, Petitioner, v. United States was argued on October 17, 1967. Case was decided on December 18, 1967. Facts of the Case.

milek
Download Presentation

Katz v . United States

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Katz v. United States

  2. Where and When The case Charles Katz, Petitioner, v. United States was argued on October 17, 1967. Case was decided on December 18, 1967.

  3. Facts of the Case The Defendant was convicted in the District Court for the Southern District of California under an indictment charging him with transmitting wagering information by telephone. FBI agents had attached an electronic listening and recording device outside of the public telephone booth from which the Defendant placed his calls. Certiorari (a writ or order by which a higher court reviews a decision of a lower court), was granted in order to consider the constitutional questions thus presented by the possible violations of the fourth amendment.

  4. Arguments Argument One – “The Fourth Amendment protects people, not places.” If something is knowingly exposed to the public view, it is not a subject of Fourth Amendment protection. However, what someone seeks to preserve as private, even if that area is accessible to the public, it may be constitutionally protected.

  5. Arguments Argument Two – The petitioner made his calls from a telephone booth that was composed partly of glass, so he was visible to the outside, but the petitioner wasn’t trying to hide anything that could be seen – he was trying to exclude an uninvited ear. A person in a telephone booth may rely on the protection of the Fourth Amendment because when he shuts the door behind him and pays the toll, he is expecting his call to be private. Although the recording device was placed outside of the booth, it still listened to what was on the inside, and what the Defendant sought to be excluded as private.

  6. Arguments Argument Three – The Government’s position is that its agents acted in a defendable manner. They did not use electronic surveillance until investigation showed a strong probability that the Defendant was using the telephone to transmit gambling information to other states. The agents limited their surveillance to when the Defendant was using the phone, and when he was calling about the information in question.

  7. Arguments Argument Four – However, even though the agents voluntarily limited their search, the information was still obtained without a warrant. The limits were set by themselves, and not by a judicial officer. Therefore, they were violating the Fourth Amendment.

  8. Decision of the Court The decision of the court was that the Defendant’s Fourth Amendment rights had been violated. The search took place in an area that he wished to exclude as private. The closed telephone booth showed a reasonable expectation of privacy. People in a telephone booth would assume that since they have closed the door and paid the toll, their call is not being intercepted.

More Related