Katz v. United States
Significance, The Pros And Cons Of Wiretapping
That evidence obtained by a wiretap on a public phone violated the Fourth Amendment's prohibition of unreasonable search and seizure and should have been ruled inadmissible.
Chief Lawyers for Petitioner
Harvey A. Schneider and Burton Marks
Chief Lawyer for Respondent
John S. Martin, Jr.
Justices for the Court
William J. Brennan, Jr., William O. Douglas, Abe Fortas, John Marshall Harlan II, Thurgood Marshall, Potter Stewart (writing for the Court), Earl Warren, Byron R. White
Hugo Lafayette Black
Date of Decision
17 October 1967
Placing a wiretap on a public phone violates the Fourth Amendment.
- Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438 (1928).
- Beck v. Ohio, 379 U.S. 89 (1964).
- United States v. U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan, 407 U.S. 297 (1972).
- Arkansas v. Sanders, 442 U.S. 753 (1979).
- California v. Ciraolo, 476 U.S. 207 (1986).
- California v. Greenwood, 486 U.S. 35 (1988).
Levy, Leonard W., ed. Encyclopedia of the American Constitution. New York: Macmillan, 1986.
- Ferguson, Robert W. Legal Aspects of Evidence. New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1978.
- Friedman, Phillip. Inadmissible Evidence. New York: Ivy Books, 1993.
- Landynski, Jacob W. The Living U.S. Constitution. New York: New American Library, 1983.
- Katzenbach v. McClung - Significance, Further Readings
- Kastigar v. United States - Case Background, How Comprehensive Must The Offered Immunity Be?
- Katz v. United States - Significance
- Katz v. United States - The Pros And Cons Of Wiretapping
- Other Free Encyclopedias