68 Cited authorities

Illinois v. Gates
462 U.S. 213 (1983) Cited 18,971 times 28 Legal Analyses
Holding that a warrant may issue only when probable cause exists under the "totality-of-the-circumstances"
Franks v. Delaware
438 U.S. 154 (1978) Cited 11,235 times 33 Legal Analyses
Holding that "the defendant is entitled, under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments, to his hearing" if he makes the required preliminary showing
Maryland v. Pringle
540 U.S. 366 (2003) Cited 2,257 times 6 Legal Analyses
Holding that probable cause existed to arrest all of a vehicle's occupants after police discovered cocaine and money over which no occupant claimed possession
Katz v. United States
389 U.S. 347 (1967) Cited 12,475 times 74 Legal Analyses
Holding that failure to recognize a reasonable expectation of privacy in a telephone booth would "ignore the vital role that the public telephone has come to play in private communication"
Samson v. California
547 U.S. 843 (2006) Cited 1,347 times 21 Legal Analyses
Holding that a similarly worded condition imposed on all California parolees did not violate the Fourth Amendment, even without the reasonable suspicion restriction
Kyllo v. United States
533 U.S. 27 (2001) Cited 1,612 times 41 Legal Analyses
Holding that the use of a thermal imager to detect heat radiating from a home was a search
City of Indianapolis v. Edmond
531 U.S. 32 (2000) Cited 1,057 times 14 Legal Analyses
Holding that "narcotics-detection" checkpoint lacked sufficient "special need" because its "primary purpose was to detect evidence of ordinary criminal wrongdoing"
Griffin v. Wisconsin
483 U.S. 868 (1987) Cited 1,543 times 7 Legal Analyses
Holding that supervision is a special need of the state "permitting a degree of impingent upon privacy that would not be constitutional if applied to the public at large."
Camara v. Municipal Court
387 U.S. 523 (1967) Cited 2,921 times 15 Legal Analyses
Holding that "broad statutory safeguards are no substitute for individualized review, particularly when those safeguards may only be invoked at the risk of a criminal penalty"
United States v. Valenzuela-Bernal
458 U.S. 858 (1982) Cited 1,504 times 4 Legal Analyses
Holding that, while a criminal defendant cannot be deprived of his right to call witnesses in his favor “arbitrarily,” the defendant “must at least make some plausible showing of how [the proposed witness'] testimony would have been both material and favorable to his defense”
Section 2510 - Definitions
18 U.S.C. § 2510 Cited 4,250 times 78 Legal Analyses
Defining "[i]nvestigative or law enforcement officer" as an officer "empowered by law to conduct investigations of or to make arrests for [certain] offenses . . . and any attorney authorized by law to prosecute or participate in the prosecution of such offenses"
Section 2518 - Procedure for interception of wire, oral, or electronic communications
18 U.S.C. § 2518 Cited 2,896 times 13 Legal Analyses
Recognizing that some investigative techniques may be “too dangerous”
Section 2511 - Interception and disclosure of wire, oral, or electronic communications prohibited
18 U.S.C. § 2511 Cited 2,781 times 42 Legal Analyses
Imposing a penalty on persons who “intentionally intercept ... any wire, oral, or electronic communication”
Section 2701 - Unlawful access to stored communications
18 U.S.C. § 2701 Cited 1,324 times 135 Legal Analyses
Holding liable any person who "intentionally accesses without authorization a facility through which an electronic communication service is provided ... and thereby obtains, alters, or prevents authorized access to a wire or electronic communication while it is in electronic storage"
Section 2517 - Authorization for disclosure and use of intercepted wire, oral, or electronic communications
18 U.S.C. § 2517 Cited 401 times
Restricting disclosure of the contents of wiretap communications to the enumerated provisions
Section 1801 - Definitions
50 U.S.C. § 1801 Cited 280 times 10 Legal Analyses
Defining "United States person" to be a "citizen of the United States, an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence" or certain unincorporated associations or corporations with ties to the United States
Section 1806 - Use of information
50 U.S.C. § 1806 Cited 169 times 4 Legal Analyses
Allowing in camera , ex parte review of the legality of electronic surveillance under FISA Subchapter I if "the Attorney General files an affidavit under oath that disclosure or an adversary hearing would harm the national security of the United States"
Section 934 - Art. 134. General article
10 U.S.C. § 934 Cited 168 times 3 Legal Analyses
Prohibiting conduct which is of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces, or conduct which is prejudicial to good order and discipline
Section 1804 - Applications for court orders
50 U.S.C. § 1804 Cited 109 times 1 Legal Analyses
Authorizing electronic surveillance under FISA
Section 1805 - Issuance of order
50 U.S.C. § 1805 Cited 100 times
Requiring "probable cause to believe . . . the target of the electronic surveillance is a foreign power or an agent of a foreign power"

United States of America v. Millay

68 Cited authorities

Holding that a warrant may issue only when probable cause exists under the "totality-of-the-circumstances"

Holding that "the defendant is entitled, under the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments, to his hearing" if he makes the required preliminary showing

Holding that probable cause existed to arrest all of a vehicle's occupants after police discovered cocaine and money over which no occupant claimed possession

Holding that failure to recognize a reasonable expectation of privacy in a telephone booth would "ignore the vital role that the public telephone has come to play in private communication"

Holding that a similarly worded condition imposed on all California parolees did not violate the Fourth Amendment, even without the reasonable suspicion restriction

Holding that the use of a thermal imager to detect heat radiating from a home was a search

Holding that "narcotics-detection" checkpoint lacked sufficient "special need" because its "primary purpose was to detect evidence of ordinary criminal wrongdoing"

Holding that supervision is a special need of the state "permitting a degree of impingent upon privacy that would not be constitutional if applied to the public at large."

Holding that "broad statutory safeguards are no substitute for individualized review, particularly when those safeguards may only be invoked at the risk of a criminal penalty"

Holding that, while a criminal defendant cannot be deprived of his right to call witnesses in his favor “arbitrarily,” the defendant “must at least make some plausible showing of how [the proposed witness'] testimony would have been both material and favorable to his defense”

Defining "[i]nvestigative or law enforcement officer" as an officer "empowered by law to conduct investigations of or to make arrests for [certain] offenses . . . and any attorney authorized by law to prosecute or participate in the prosecution of such offenses"

Recognizing that some investigative techniques may be “too dangerous”

Imposing a penalty on persons who “intentionally intercept ... any wire, oral, or electronic communication”

Holding liable any person who "intentionally accesses without authorization a facility through which an electronic communication service is provided ... and thereby obtains, alters, or prevents authorized access to a wire or electronic communication while it is in electronic storage"

Restricting disclosure of the contents of wiretap communications to the enumerated provisions

Defining "United States person" to be a "citizen of the United States, an alien lawfully admitted for permanent residence" or certain unincorporated associations or corporations with ties to the United States

Allowing in camera , ex parte review of the legality of electronic surveillance under FISA Subchapter I if "the Attorney General files an affidavit under oath that disclosure or an adversary hearing would harm the national security of the United States"

Prohibiting conduct which is of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces, or conduct which is prejudicial to good order and discipline

Authorizing electronic surveillance under FISA

Requiring "probable cause to believe . . . the target of the electronic surveillance is a foreign power or an agent of a foreign power"