Katz v. United States and Terry v. Ohio

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

The Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution is part of the Bill of Rights. It prohibits unwarranted searches and requires that any search warrants be issued by a court on reasonable grounds, except in cases of federal law. This paper aims to analyze the cases of Katz v. United States and Terry v. Ohio as the Fourth Amendment highlight cases. In both cases, the Supreme Court opened a new page in the application of this amendment.

In the case of Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967), the defendant was sentenced by a federal court on charges of illegal gambling. He organized them using a long-distance telephone which was a crime against federal law. The judge admitted evidence in the form of records of the defendant’s telephone conversations obtained by FBI agents who installed eavesdropping equipment outside the telephone booth, from which the accused called when he was committing a crime.

The legal question presented to the court was the possibility of recognizing the recording of the telephone conversation as an unjustified action. The Supreme Court rejected a conviction, according to which the Fourth Amendment does not prohibit wiretapping when representatives of the investigating authorities have not violated the privacy of the accused or confiscated any item (Katz v. United States, 1967). Before the decision, the wiretapping itself was not recognized as an act of search unless it was accompanied by a violation of the inviolability of the premises.

In Katz v. United States (1967), the prosecutor’s office insisted that the payphone booth was not a constitutionally protected building and the eavesdropping equipment was outside it. The Supreme Court decided that it should be established whether the intention of the accused was to give his actions a personal character, while the place of search should not matter. Thus, the possibility of bypassing the Fourth Amendment by the police was eliminated, which used other methods of search, except for a purely physical one.

Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967) is significant for another reason as well. Judge Harlan defined the criterion subsequently used by the courts to establish a violation or non-violation of the Fourth Amendment. This criterion is called “reasonable expectation of privacy” and is based on two prerequisites. First, the person must show a subjective expectation of respect for the right to privacy. Second, the expectation must be of the kind that society can recognize as reasonable (Katz v. United States, 1967). Harlan observed that the home is usually the place where a person expects privacy. However, objects, actions, or statements that are openly viewed are not protected. Thus, conversations conducted in public places are not subject to eavesdropping protection.

Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968) is also an important Fourth Amendment case. Terry asked the United States Supreme Court to determine the legality of the so-called stop-and-frisk searches, a policing practice in which police officers stop passers-by on the street and examine them for illegal smuggling. According to the Supreme Court, this practice is legal under the Fourth Amendment if the officer has a reasonable suspicion that the suspect is dangerous (Terry v. Ohio, 1968). If the officer asks questions and believes the suspect is armed based on experience and knowledge, then the officer can conduct a brief investigative search known as stop-and-frisk.

The issue presented to the court was the legality of search under the Fourth Amendment to the US Constitution. The Supreme Court stated that, for their protection, the police can perform a quick search for a person’s outer clothing for weapons if they have a reasonable suspicion that the person is armed (Terry v. Ohio, 1968). This reasonable suspicion must be based on definite and expressible facts and not simply on an official’s guess. Terry’s standard was later expanded to include temporary detention of people in vehicles.

Both Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967) and Terry v. Ohio, 392 U.S. 1 (1968) were the important Supreme Court decisions in US history. In the first case, the court adjusted the right to privacy of communications. In the second case, it regulated the legality of the stop-and-frisk searches. In both cases, the Supreme Court established a new basis for striking a balance between the need to fight crime and civil rights and freedoms.