Case Name and Citation: Katz v. the United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967)
Court Issuing the Decision: U.S Supreme Court
Statement of Facts: Katz was convicted after FBI agents tapped into the public phone booth and heard him making illegal gambling bets. The FBI agents through recording and listening devices heard the petitioner end of conversations.
Procedural History: Katz, at trial, was in the objection of the introduction of evidence of the bugged telephone conversation. The trial court, however, went ahead and admitted this evidence. The conviction was upheld by the appellate court. It cited that Katz Fourth Amendment rights protection from unwarranted searches and seizures was not infringed. This is because the FBI agents did not enter the public phone booth where the said conversations had been recorded. The lower court decision was reversed by the U.S Supreme Court.
Delegate your assignment to our experts and they will do the rest.
Issue : Whether Katz Fourth Amendment rights were violated when the FBI agents tapped into his conversation in the public phone booth using listening and recording devices?
Holding: Yes, Katz right to privacy was violated by the government. Reversed
Rationale : The court cited that both parties had looked at the issue incorrectly. The proper question ought to have focused on establishing whether electronically listening and recording to the petitioner was a violation of privacy? However, the parties had dwelled on querying whether the public telephone booth was indeed a constitutionally protected area. The Supreme Court held that the Fourth Amendment right to privacy was framed to protect people and not places or locations.
The government stressed the fact that the telephone booth used by the petitioner was partly made of glass meaning that he was visible even to the outside parties. The court noted that Katz was not evading the “intruding eye” but was avoiding the “uninvited ear.” His decision to make a call in the public phone booth did not mean that he had shed his right to privacy. The court restated that the constitution demands a judicial officer’s judgment should not stand between the police and the citizenry. As the searches carried out without the right judicial process are unreasonable per se, this case was REVERSED.
References
Katz v. United States. (1967.). Oyez . Retrieved from https://www.oyez.org/cases/1967/35
