385 U.S. 967 (1966), 615, Berger v. New York

Docket Nº:No. 615.
Citation:385 U.S. 967, 87 S.Ct. 505, 17 L.Ed.2d 432
Party Name:Ralph BERGER, petitioner, v. NEW YORK.
Case Date:December 05, 1966
Court:United States Supreme Court
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 967

385 U.S. 967 (1966)

87 S.Ct. 505, 17 L.Ed.2d 432

Ralph BERGER, petitioner,

v.

NEW YORK.

No. 615.

United States Supreme Court.

December 5, 1966

COUNSEL

Joseph E. Brill, for petitioner.

Frank S. Hogan, for respondent.

Victor Rabinowitz, Leonard B. Boudin, Samuel A. Neuburger and Raymond W. Bergan, for Habel and others, amici curiae.

OPINION

Petition for writ of certiorari to the Court of Appeals of New York granted limited to Questions 1 and 2 presented by the petition which read as follows:

'1. Assuming the basic Federal Fourth and Fifth Amendment constitutionality of New York State's permissive eavesdrop legislation which allows electronic room eavesdropping or 'bugging' by ex parte Court order (N.Y.Code Crim.Proc.§ 813-a), where the ex parte

Page 968

Court orders for the room eavesdrops in this particular case without which this prosecution stipulatedly could not have been instituted or maintained, nevertheless invalid under the Fourth Amendment because not based upon an adequate showing of probable cause?

'2. Is the New York ex parte permissive eavesdrop legislation (N.Y.Code Crim.Proc. § 813-a) unconstitutional under the Federal Fourth, Fifth and Fourteenth Amendments as setting up a system which intrinsically involves trespassory intrusion into private premises, 'general' searches for 'mere evidence' and invasion of the privilege against self incrimination; and were the particular room eavesdrops here involved unconstitutional on those grounds?'

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP