Katz v. United States (1967)
In 1967, the security agents, FBI arrested Katz and charged him for conducting illicit gambling activities from California to Boston and Miami. The FBI placed a listening and recording gadget on the telephone booth and listened to Katz illegal conversation. In the Southern District Court found Katz guilty and sentenced him. The defendant appealed against the case, but the court of Appeal affirmed the charges. Katz appealed for his case to be ruled by the Supreme Court.
Issue
The issue, which Katz seeks a review of the ruling is the government has no right to wire-tape a public phone booth without a warranty. This move is against the search and seizure provision in the Fourth Amendment of the American constitution.
Held
After voting in the Supreme Court, it was held that the FBI’s idea of placing a listening and recording gadget on the public phone booth in Los Angeles violated the search and seizure clause as it is provided in the Fourth Amendment. The majority of Judges agreed that both parties (Katz and the FBI) were constitutionally wrong; however, it was in favor of Katz who sought judicial justice through court appeals.
Rationale
Ideally, the FBI could have sought for judicial search warranty before they could have “wire-tapped” the defendant. On the other hand, it was wrong for Katz to conduct illegal activities using public telephone booth. According to the majority of Judges, the Fourth amendment safeguards people rights, and not places and for this reason; when a person exposes himself to the public, knowingly, from his office or home, he is not subject to the protection of the Fourth Amendment. Nevertheless, when a person exposes himself to the public and he seeks to conduct secret activities; then, the Fourth Amendment covers him. With regard to this, the Supreme Court reviewed the Katz appeal and ruled in his favor saying that the evidence gathered against Katz should not be used, as the Judiciary did not validate it. This is because of the FBI’s failure to obtain search and seizure warranty before proceeding with recording and listening to Katz conversation.
Rule of Law
According to the search and seizure clause in the Fourth Amendment, no person should be subjected to unreasonable seizure or searches, which would be done in their documents, private property and houses unless upon a plausible cause supported by the court specifying places and persons to be searched.
