PAGE

Silverthorne Lumber Co. v. United States, 251 U. S.

385 (1920)

Stanford v. Texas, 379 U. S. 476 (1965)

55, 89 40, 51

State of Bisaccia, 45 N. J. 504, 213 A. 2d 185 (1965)
39, 40, 41, 44, 46, 47, 48, 49
State v. Chinn, 231 Ore. 259, 373 P. 2d 392 (1962)
Steele v. United States, 267 U. S. 498 (1925)
Sutton v. United States, 289 F. 488 (5th Cir. 1923)

United States v. Borgese, 235 F. Supp. 286 (S. D.
N. Y. 1964)

47

52

51

50

United States v. Boyette, 299 F. 2d 92 (4th Cir. 1962)
United States v. Bozza, 365 F. 2d 206 (2d Cir. 1966)..
United States v. Di Re, 332 U. S. 581 (1948)
United States v. Edwards, 296 F. 2d 512 (E. D. Mich.
1924)

47

90

53

52

United States v. Eisner, 297 F. 2d 595 (6th Cir. 1962) cert. den. 369 U. S. 859 (1962)

55, 92

United States v. Guido, 251 F. 2d 1 (7th Cir. 1958) United States v. Howard, 138 F. Supp. 376 (D. C. Md. 1956)

47

United States v. Howell, 240 F. 2d 149 (3rd Cir. 1956)
United States v. Kaplan, 16 F. 2d 802 (D. C. Mass.

1926)

52

United States v. Kirschenblatt, 16 F. 2d 202 (2d Cir.

1926)

43

United States v. Kraus, 270 Fed. 578 (S. D. N. Y. 1921)

43

United States v. Lee, 274 U. S. 559 (1927)
United States v. Lefkowitz, 285 U. S. 452 (1932)
United States v. Lerner, 100 F. Supp. 765 (N. D. Cal.
1951)

36

38

47

United States v. Meeks, 313 F. 2d 464 (6th Cir. 1963) 92
United States v. Mitchell, 322 U. S. 65 (1944)
United States v. Old Dominion Warehouse, 10 F. 2d

.....

8885

59

736 (2d Cir. 1926)

56

PAGE

92

United States v. On Lee, 193 F. 2d 306 (2d Cir. 1951) 47 United States v. Poller, 43 F. 2d 911 (2d Cir. 1930) ....44, 53 United States v. Ramirez, 279 F. 2d 712 (2d Cir. 1960) United States v. Trujillo, 191 F. 2d 852 (7th Cir. 1951) United States v. White, 322 U. S. 694 (1944)

Warden v. Hayden, Oct. Term 1966, No. 480, cert. granted, 385 U. S. 926 (1966)

Williams v. United States, 263 F. 2d 487 (D. C. Cir.

1959)

92

41, 42

39

55

Wolf v. Colorado, 338 U. S. 25 (1949)

.66, 67

Wong Sun v. United States, 371 U. S. 471 (1963). 32, 48, 88

Zap v. United States, 328 U. S. 624 (1946)

47, 55

Statutes and Constitutions:

40 Stat. 1017

31

Maryland Ann. Code, Art. 27, Sec. 125A (c)

59

Massachusetts Gen. Laws Annot., Chap. 272, Sec. 99....

59

Beaney, The Constitutional Right to Privacy in the Supreme Court, THE SUPREME COURT REVIEW OF 1962

Comment, Eavesdropping and the Constitution: A Reappraisal of the Fourth Amendment Framework, 50 MINN. L. REV. 378 (1966)

63

63

Comment, Eavesdropping Orders and The Fourth Amendment, 66 COLUM. L. REV. 355 (1966). 39, 43, 50, 52

Comment, 31 YALE L. J. 518 (1922)

DASH, KNOWLTON & SCHWARTZ, THE EAVESDROPPERS (1959)

8 Wigmore, Evid. §§2251, 2264 (3d Ed. 1940)

38

31, 33

38

IV Blackstone, §168

31

Friendly, The Bill of Rights as a Code of Criminal
Procedure, 53 CALIF. L. REV. 929 (1965)

49

(1959)

Hearings, 5th Congress, 2d Session, Pt. 3, pp. 513-14

Kamisar, The Wiretapping-Eavesdropping Problem:
A Professor's View, 44 MINN. L. REV. 891 (1960)

52

81-82

PAGE

Kaplan, Search and Seizure: A No-Man's Land in
The Criminal Law, 49 CALIF. L. REV. 474 (1961)

King, Electronic Surveillance and Constitutional
Rights: Some Recent Developments and Obser-
vations, 33 GEO. W. L. REV. 240 (1964)

LANDYNSKI, SEARCH AND SEIZURES AND THE SUPREME
COURT (1966)

LASSON, THE HISTORY AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE
FOURTH AMENDMENT TO THE UNITED STATES CON-
STITUTION (1934)

Note, Limitation on Seizure of Evidentiary Objects:
A Rule in Search of a Reason, 20 U. CHIC. L. Rev.
319 (1953)

Note, Wiretapping and the Congress, 52 MICH. L. REV. 430 (1954)

1 Hale Pleas of the Crown 419

Report by the President's Commission on Law Enforcement and the Administration of Justice, The Challenge of Crime in a Free Society (1967)

39

34

31, 40

40

39

31, 33

43

70, 71, 72, 73, 82

Rosenzweig, The Law of Wiretapping, 33 CORNELL L.

Q. 73 (1947)
Semerjian, Proposals on Wiretapping in Light of Re-

31

cent Senate Hearings, 45 B. U. L. REV. 216 (1965) 34 75 HARV. L. REV. 40, 186 (1961)

35

Westin, Science, Privacy and Freedom, 66 COLUM. L.

REV. 1003 (1966)

33,50

The Court of Appeals of the State of New York affirmed the judgment without opinion, Chief Judge DESMOND and Judge FULD dissenting in an opinion reported at 18 N.Y.2d 638, 640 (1966).

The Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York, First Department, unanimously affirmed the judgment without opinion at 25 App. Div. 2d 718 (1966).