The petitioner, Katz (the “petitioner”), was convicted of transmitting wagering information over telephone lines in violation of federal law. Acting on a suspicion that Katz was transmitting gambling information over the phone to clients in other states, Federal agents attached an eavesdropping device to the outside of a public phone booth used by Katz.
652, rests on the 'supervisory power' of this Court over other federal courts and is not rooted in the Fourth Amendment. State of New York, 388 U.S. 41, 76, 87 S.Ct. Argued October 17, 1967. § 1084. On December 18, 1967, the Supreme Court ruled in Katz v. United States, expanding the Fourth Amendment protection against “unreasonable searches and seizures” to cover electronic wiretaps. On appeal, Katz challenged his conviction arguing that the recordings could not be used as evidence ag… 1873, 1892, 18 L.Ed.2d 1040, I continue to believe that this exclusionary rule formulated in Weeks v. United States, 232 U.S. 383, 34 S.Ct. Charles Katz lived in Los Angeles and was one of the leading basketball handicappers in … As Justice Potter Stewart famously wrote, the Fourth Amendment “protects people, not places.” Facts of Katz v United States 35 Argued: October 17, 1967 Decided: December 18, 1967. Based on recordings of his end of the conversations, Katz was convicted under an eight-count indictment for the illegal transmission of wagering information from Los Angeles to Boston and Miami. 35.
No. 389 U.S. 347 . Petitioner was convicted under an indictment charging him with transmitting wagering information by telephone across state lines in violation of 18 U.S.C. Unbeknownst to him, the Federal Bureau of Investigation(FBI) had begun investigating his gambling activities, and was recording … Syllabus. Charles Katz was a resident of Los Angeles, California, who had long been involved in sports betting.
The agents placed electronic listening and recording devices to the outside of the booth and only heard and recorded Katz’s end of the conversations. By the mid-1960s, he had become "probably the preeminent college basketball handicapper in America." In February 1965, Katz on several occasions used a public telephone booth near his apartment on Sunset Boulevard to provide his gambling handicaps to bookmakers in Boston and Miami. Decided December 18, 1967. The government had entered into evidence the petitioner’s end of telephone conversations that the government had obtained by placing a listening device to the phone booth that the petitioner used. Petitioner was convicted under an indictment charging him with transmitting wagering information by telephone across state lines in violation of 18 U.S.C. In Katz v United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967), the U.S. Supreme Court held that warrantless wiretapping constituted a search under the Fourth Amendment, concluding that a physical intrusion was unnecessary. Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967) Katz v. United States. KATZ v. UNITED STATES(1967) No.
Largely based on the test provided in Justice Harlan’s concurrence, Katz v. United States is well known for establishing Fourth Amendment protection for statements made when a person has a “reasonable expectation of privacy,” regardless of locale. See Wolf v.
1084. 341, 58 L.Ed. Katz was arrested after FBI agents overheard him making illegal gambling bets while in a public phone booth.