US v White - case brief PDF

Title US v White - case brief
Author Kara Chrispen
Course Rules Of Evidence For The Administration Of Justice
Institution Illinois State University
Pages 2
File Size 44.9 KB
File Type PDF
Total Downloads 30
Total Views 165

Summary

case brief...


Description

Kara Chrispen CJS 305-01 9-2-15 US. V. White 401 U.S. 745 (1971) FACTS: There were eight different conversations between a government informant, Harvey Jackson, and the defendant, James White. There were four conversations that took place in Jackson’s home; each of these conversations were overheard by an agent concealed I a kitchen closet with Jackson’s consent and by a second agent outside the house using a radio receiver. Four other conversations took place, one in White’s home, one in a restaurant and two in Jackson’s car. These were overheard using radio equipment. Jackson was unable to produce at the trial and White was convicted and found guilty. QUESTION: Does electronic surveillance without a warrant violate the Fourth Amendment? NO WHITE (Majority): 1. Electronically recording a conversation does not violate the law as long as the privacy of the other person is not violated. 2. If the law permits informants then it should permit electronically recorded conversations. 3. If someone is involved in illegal activities, they know that risks of their companions going to the police. 4. Electronic monitoring will more than likely be better evidence than say a police officer’s memory, because it cannot be changed. DOUGLAS (Dissent): 1. Eavesdropping is the same as electronic surveillance. 2. The Constitution does not account for the modern technology. 3. Our nation has become very fearful. We should not have to worry about our conversations being recorded. 4. Technology is only going to advance with more ways of surveillance. HARLAN (DISSENT) 1. There should have been a warrant present for this surveillance. 2. If someone knew that someone else was wired then they would, of course, not say everything that he or she may want to. 3. This does not affect just criminals, it also affects the citizens whether they are lawabiding or not.

4. Electronic monitoring has no place in our society except for interviews in a closed space for law enforcement...


Similar Free PDFs