Katz v. United States
Read the full opinion on CourtListener · The case as printed (Library of Congress)
Syllabus
The syllabus is prepared by the Reporter of Decisions and is not part of the opinion of the Court. It is shown as printed in the United States Reports, read from the text layer of the Library of Congress scan (optical character recognition in older volumes, not yet checked word by word against the page).
Petitioner was convicted under an indictment charging him with transmitting wagering information by telephone across state lines in violation of 18 U. S. C. § 1084. Evidence of petitioner's end of the conversations, overheard by FBI agents who had attached an electronic listening and recording device to the outside of the telephone booth from which the calls were made, was introduced at the trial. The Court of Appeals affirmed the conviction, finding that there was no Fourth Amendment violation since there was "no physical entrance into the area occupied by" petitioner. Held:
Printed on p. 347 of the United States Reports, read from the text layer of the Library of Congress scan. View the page image
1. The Government's eavesdropping activities violated the privacy upon which petitioner justifiably relied while using the telephone booth and thus constituted a "search and seizure" within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment. Pp. 350-353.
Printed on p. 347 of the United States Reports, read from the text layer of the Library of Congress scan. View the page image
(a) The Fourth Amendment governs not only the seizure of tangible items but extends as well to the recording of oral statements. Silverman v. United States, 365 U. S. 505, 511. P. 353.
Printed on p. 347 of the United States Reports, read from the text layer of the Library of Congress scan. View the page image
(b) Because the Fourth Amendment protects people rather than places, its reach cannot turn on the presence or absence of a physical intrusion into any given enclosure. The "trespass" doctrine of Olmstead v. United States, 277 U. S. 438, and Goldman v. United States, 316 U. S. 129, is no longer controlling. Pp. 351, 353.
Printed on p. 347 of the United States Reports, read from the text layer of the Library of Congress scan. View the page image
2. Although the surveillance in this case may have been so narrowly circumscribed that it could constitutionally have been authorized in advance, it was not in fact conducted pursuant to the warrant procedure which is a constitutional precondition of such electronic surveillance. Pp. 354-359.
Printed on p. 347 of the United States Reports, read from the text layer of the Library of Congress scan. View the page image
369 F. 2d 130, reversed.
Printed on p. 347 of the United States Reports, read from the text layer of the Library of Congress scan. View the page image
Provisions
The Constitution Annotated's essays on these provisions cite this case.
- Amendment IIIsuggested link
Source: Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation (2022 ed.), essays Amdt3.1, Amdt3.2, Amdt3.3, pp. 1601, 1604.
- Amendment IVsuggested link
Source: Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation (2022 ed.), essays Amdt4.3.1, Amdt4.3.3, Amdt4.3.5, Amdt4.3.6, Amdt4.3.6.1, Amdt4.5.2, Amdt4.5.3, Amdt4.6, Amdt4.6.1, Amdt4.6.2, Amdt4.6.6.5, pp. 1612, 1613, 1617, 1618, 1619, 1622, 1638, 1643, 1669.
Overrules
- Olmstead v. United States (1928)suggested link
Source: Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation (2022 ed.), Table of Supreme Court Decisions Overruled by Subsequent Decisions, p. 2444: Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967) — Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438 (1928).
- Goldman v. United States (1942)suggested link
Source: Constitution of the United States of America: Analysis and Interpretation (2022 ed.), Table of Supreme Court Decisions Overruled by Subsequent Decisions, p. 2444: Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967) — Goldman v. United States, 316 U.S. 129 (1942).
Why it is here
The library's first set of cases is chosen by fixed rules from the Constitution Annotated (2022), which cites this case as “Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967)”:
- cited on 11 pages