WestlawDocument000716.docx
- 文档编号:3373222
- 上传时间:2022-11-22
- 格式:DOCX
- 页数:18
- 大小:38.65KB
WestlawDocument000716.docx
《WestlawDocument000716.docx》由会员分享,可在线阅读,更多相关《WestlawDocument000716.docx(18页珍藏版)》请在冰豆网上搜索。
WestlawDocument000716
89S.Ct.1030
FOREDUCATIONALUSEONLY
Page_
394U.S.244,89S.Ct.1030,22L.Ed.2d248
(Citeas:
394U.S.244,89S.Ct.1030)
©2014ThomsonReuters.NoClaimtoOrig.USGov.Works.
89S.Ct.1030
FOREDUCATIONALUSEONLY
Page_
394U.S.244,89S.Ct.1030,22L.Ed.2d248
(Citeas:
394U.S.244,89S.Ct.1030)
©2014ThomsonReuters.NoClaimtoOrig.USGov.Works.
SupremeCourtoftheUnitedStates
SamuelDESISTetal.,Petitioners,
v.
UNITEDSTATES.
No.12.
ArguedNov.12,1968.
DecidedMarch24,1969.
RehearingDeniedMay26,1969.See395U.S.931,89S.Ct.1766.
DefendantswereconvictedintheUnitedStatesDistrictCourtfortheSouthernDistrictofNewYorkofconspiringtoimportandconcealheroininviolationofthefederalnarcoticslawsandonremandfromtheCourtofAppealstoascertainextentofgovernment'suseofelectronicequipmentinobtainingevidenceagainstdefendants,theDistrictCourt,277F.Supp.690,foundnoviolationofconstitutionalrights.Onappeal,theCourtofAppeals,384F.2d889,affirmedandcertiorariwasgranted.TheSupremeCourt,Mr.JusticeStewart,heldthatSupremeCourtdecisionoverrulingcasesholdingthatsearchandseizureofspeechrequiressometrespassoractualpenetrationofaparticularenclosureistobeappliedonlytocasesinwhichprosecutionseekstointroducefruitsofelectronicsurveillanceconductedafterDecember18,1967.
Affirmed.
Mr.JusticeDouglas,Mr.JusticeHarlanandMr.JusticeFortasdissented.
FordissentingopinionbyMr.JusticeFortassee89S.Ct.1048.
WestHeadnotes
[1]FederalCourts170B
3146
170BFederalCourts
170BXVISupremeCourt
170BXVI(B)DecisionsReviewable
170Bk3144ParticularCases,Contexts,andQuestions
170Bk3146k.Criminalmatters.MostCitedCases
(Formerly170Bk458,106k383
(1))
Certiorariwasgrantedtoconsiderconstitutionalquestionspresentedbygovernment'suseofevidenceconsistingoftaperecordingsofconversationsmadebymeansofelectronicrecordingdevice.U.S.C.A.Const.Amend.4.
[2]CriminalLaw110
392.49(9)
110CriminalLaw
110XVIIEvidence
110XVII(I)CompetencyinGeneral
110k392.1WrongfullyObtainedEvidence
110k392.49EvidenceonMotions
110k392.49(3)WeightandSufficiency
110k392.49(9)k.Wiretaps;electronicsurveillance.MostCitedCases
(Formerly110k394.6(4))
Evidencesupportedfindings,athearingtoascertainextentofgovernment'suseofelectronicequipmentinobtainingevidenceagainstdefendantschargedwithconspiringtoimportandconcealheroin,thatevidenceusedagainstdefendantswasnottaintedbyanyinvasionoftheirconstitutionalrights.NarcoticDrugsImportandExportAct,§2(b-e,f),21U.S.C.A.§§173,174;U.S.C.A.Const.Amend.4.
[3]Courts106
100
(1)
106Courts
106IIEstablishment,Organization,andProcedure
106II(H)EffectofReversalorOverruling
106k100InGeneral
106k100
(1)k.Ingeneral;retroactiveorprospectiveoperation.MostCitedCases
Criteriaguidingresolutionofquestionofretroactivityornonretroactivityofdecisionsexpoundingnewconstitutionalrulesaffectingcriminaltrialsimplicatethepurposetobeservedbythenewstandard,theextentofthereliancebylawenforcementauthoritiesontheoldstandards,andtheeffectontheadministrationofjusticeofaretroactiveapplicationofthenewstandards.
[4]Courts106
100
(1)
106Courts
106IIEstablishment,Organization,andProcedure
106II(H)EffectofReversalorOverruling
106k100InGeneral
106k100
(1)k.Ingeneral;retroactiveorprospectiveoperation.MostCitedCases
Foremostfactortobeconsideredindeterminingretroactivityornonretroactivityofdecisionsexpoundingnewconstitutionalrulesaffectingcriminaltrialsisthepurposetobeservedbythenewconstitutionalrule.
[5]SearchesandSeizures349
23
349SearchesandSeizures
349IInGeneral
349k23k.FourthAmendmentandreasonablenessingeneral.MostCitedCases
(Formerly349k7
(1))
FourthAmendmentprohibitsonlyunreasonablesearchesandseizures.U.S.C.A.Const.Amend.4.
[6]Courts106
100
(1)
106Courts
106IIEstablishment,Organization,andProcedure
106II(H)EffectofReversalorOverruling
106k100InGeneral
106k100
(1)k.Ingeneral;retroactiveorprospectiveoperation.MostCitedCases
UnitedStatesSupremeCourtdecisionoverrulingcasesholdingthatsearchandseizureofspeechrequiressometrespassoractualpenetrationofaparticularenclosureisnotapplicabletocaseswhichwerependingondirectreviewwhendecisionwasrenderedandistobeappliedonlytocasesinwhichtheprosecutionseekstointroducethefruitsofelectronicsurveillanceconductedafterDecember18,1967.U.S.C.A.Const.Amend.4.
[7]Courts106
100
(1)
106Courts
106IIEstablishment,Organization,andProcedure
106II(H)EffectofReversalorOverruling
106k100InGeneral
106k100
(1)k.Ingeneral;retroactiveorprospectiveoperation.MostCitedCases
SupremeCourtdecisionoverrulingcasesholdingthatsearchandseizureofspeechrequiressometrespassoractualpenetrationofaparticularenclosurewasnotapplicablewhereeavesdroppingbygovernmentagentswhoplacedmicrophoneinsidetheirhotelroomagainstdoorwhichopenedtoairspaceontheothersideofwhichwasdooropeningintoroomoccupiedbydefendantsoccurredbeforeDecember18,1967.U.S.C.A.Const.Amend.4.
**1031*244AbrahamGlasser,NewYorkCity,forpetitioners.
FrancisX.Beytagh,Jr.,Cleveland,Ohio,forrespondent.
Mr.JusticeSTEWARTdeliveredtheopinionoftheCourt.
[1]ThepetitionerswereconvictedbyajuryintheDistrictCourtfortheSouthernDistrictofNewYorkofconspiringtoimportandconcealheroininviolationofthefederalnarcoticslaws.FN1AnimportantpartoftheGovernment's*245evidenceconsistedoftaperecordingsofconversationsamongseveralofthepetitionersinaNewYorkCityhotelroom.Thetapesweremadebyfederalofficersintheadjoiningroombymeansofanelectronicrecordingdevicewhichdidnotphysicallyintrudeintothepetitioners'room.FN2Becausetherewasno‘trespass'or‘actualintrusionintoaconstitutionallyprotected*246area,’theDistrictCourtandtheCourtofAppealsrejectedthepetitioners'argumentthatthisevidencewasinadmissiblebecausetheeavesdroppinghadviolatedtheirrightsundertheFourthAmendment.Theconvictionswereaffirmed,FN3andwegrantedcertioraritoconsidertheconstitutionalquestionsthuspresented.FN4
FN1.35Stat.614,asamended,21U.S.C.s173providesinpertinentpart:
‘ItisunlawfultoimportorbringanynarcoticdrugintotheUnitedStatesoranyterritoryunderitscontrolorjurisdiction***.’
21U.S.C.s174providesinpertinentpart:
‘WhoeverfraudulentlyorknowinglyimportsorbringsanynarcoticdrugintotheUnitedStatesoranyterritoryunderitscontrolorjurisdiction,contrarytolaw,orreceives,conceals,buys,sells,orinanymannerfacilitatesthetransportation,concealment,orsaleofanysuchnarcoticdrugafterbeingimportedorbroughtin,knowingthesametohavebeenimportedorbroughtintotheUnitedStatescontrarytolaw,orconspirestocommitanyofsuchactsinviolationofthelawsoftheUnitedStates,shallbeimprisonednotlessthanfiveormorethantwentyyearsand,inaddition,maybefinednotmorethan$20,000.’
FN2.Theroomoccupiedbythepetitionerswasseparatedfromthatoftheagentsbytwodoorswithasmallairspacebetweenthem.Accordingtothetestimonyofthefederalagents—whichwasproperlycreditedbybothcourtsbelowafteranexhaustivehearingthatincludedanactualreconstructionoftheequipmentinthehotelroom—themicrophonewastapedtothedoorontheirside.Thefaceofthemicrophonewasturnedtowardthe3/8-inchspacebetweenthedoorandthesill,andatowelwasplacedoverthemicrophoneandalongthebottomofthedoorinordertominimizeinterferencefromsoundsintheagents'room.Acablewasrunfromthemicrophonetoanamplifierandtaperecorderinthebathroomadjoiningtheagents'room.
Petitionerscontendthatthisinstallationwasequivalenttoaphysicalpenetrationofthepetitioners'roombecausetheairspacebetweenthedoorsactedasasoundchamber,therebyfacilitatingthepickupoftheconversationsnextdoor.Weareunable,however,todistinguishthiseavesdroppingfromthatcondonedinGoldmanv.UnitedStates,316U.S.129,62S.Ct.993,86L.Ed.1322,wheretheagentssimplyplacedasensitivereceiveragainstthepartitionwall.Petitioners'relianceonSilvermanv.UnitedStates,365U.S.505,81S.Ct.679,5L.Ed.2d734,ismisplaced.Theheatingductsystemusedasasoundconductorbytheagentsinthatcasewas‘anintegralpartofthepremisesoccupiedbythepetitioners,’365U.S.,at511,81S.Ct.,at682andtheagentshadtopenetratethepetitioners'housewitha‘spikemicrophone’beforetheheatingductcouldbethusemployed.
FN3.384F.2d889.
FN4.390U.S.943,88S.Ct.1030,19L.Ed.2d1131.
**1032[2]LastTerminKatzv.UnitedStates,389U.S.347,88S.Ct.507,19L.Ed.2d576,weheldthatthereachoftheFourthAmendment‘cannotturnuponthepresenceorabsenceofaphysicalintrusionintoanygivenenclosure.’Id.,at353,88S.Ct.,at512.Notingthatthe‘FourthAmendmentprotectspeople,notplaces,’id.,at351,88S.Ct.,at511,weoverru
- 配套讲稿:
如PPT文件的首页显示word图标,表示该PPT已包含配套word讲稿。双击word图标可打开word文档。
- 特殊限制:
部分文档作品中含有的国旗、国徽等图片,仅作为作品整体效果示例展示,禁止商用。设计者仅对作品中独创性部分享有著作权。
- 关 键 词:
- WestlawDocument000716