in Katz v. United States, the supreme court ruled on whether police could tap a public phone without a warrant identify the test that resulted from this case
a. the imminent harmful action test.
b. the warrantless action test
c. the expectation of privacy test
d. the clear and present danger test

Federal agents attached an eavesdropping device in a public phone booth used by Katz because the government suspected Katz was transmitting gambling information to his clients in other states.

Katz was convicted. But he appealed, arguing that the recordings could not be used as an evidence of his wrongdoings. The Court of Appeals rejected his petition.

peaceandlove681 peaceandlove681 · Answer 2 · 2020-10-28T06:05:52+01:00

peaceandlove681 peaceandlove681

28-10-2020

Answer:

The expectation of privacy test

Explanation:

apeex

Answer Link

in Katz v. United States, the supreme court ruled on whether police could tap a public phone without a warrant identify the test that resulted from this case a. the imminent harmful action test. b. the warrantless action test c. the expectation of privacy test d. the clear and present danger test

Respuesta :

Otras preguntas

in Katz v. United States, the supreme court ruled on whether police could tap a public phone without a warrant identify the test that resulted from this case
a. the imminent harmful action test.
b. the warrantless action test
c. the expectation of privacy test
d. the clear and present danger test