 | United States. Supreme Court, John Chandler Bancroft Davis, Henry Putzel, Henry C. Lind, Frank D. Wagner - 1980 - 1224 стор.
...on numerous occasions that the entitlement to an expectation of privacy does not hinge on ownership: "What a person knowingly exposes to the public, even...to the public, may be constitutionally protected." Katz v. United States, 389 US 347, 351-352 (1967). In Alderman v. United States, supra, at 196, Mr.... | |
 | 1976 - 884 стор.
...no reasonable expectation of privacy in his journey on the public highway, presumably arguing that "[w]hat a person knowingly exposes to the public,...is not a subject of Fourth Amendment protection." 5 While not equating "the uninvited shadower in this instance with the 'uninvited ear' described in... | |
 | United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on the Judiciary - 1971 - 1206 стор.
...optical and acoustiai devices which are used to improperly intercept private communications, held that "what a person knowingly exposes to the public, even in his own home c office, is not a subject of constitutional protection . . . the protection of i person's general... | |
 | United States. Congress. Senate. Banking and Currency Committee - 1972 - 540 стор.
...using an otherwise public telephone booth, said : "The Fourth Amendment protects people, not places. What a person knowingly exposes to the public, even...office, is not a subject of Fourth Amendment protection. See. Lewis v. United States, 385 US 206, 210 (1966) ; United States v. Lee, 274 US 559, 563 (1927).... | |
 | United States. Congress. Senate. Committee on Banking, Housing, and Urban Affairs - 1972 - 1214 стор.
...using an otherwise public telephone booth, said : "The Fourth Amendment protects people, not places. What a person knowingly exposes to the public, even...office, is not a subject of Fourth Amendment protection. See. 1,1-wi» v. United States, 385 US 206, 210 (1966) ; United State* v. Lee, 274 US 559, 563 (1927).... | |
 | United States. Congress. Senate. Banking, Housing and Urban Affairscommittee - 1974 - 228 стор.
...103.45. CALIFORNIA BANKERS ASSN. v. SHULTZ 11 We said in Katz v. United States, 389 US 347, 351352. "What a person knowingly exposes to the public, even...public, may be constitutionally protected." As stated in United States v. White, 401 US 745, 752, the question is "what expectations of privacy" will be protected... | |
 | United States. Congress. Senate. Interior and Insular Affairs Committe - 1974 - 544 стор.
...invaded..." BERGER V. NEV YORK. 386 US 41 (1967). "For the Fourth Amendment protects people, not places. What a person knowingly exposes to the public, even...the public, may be constitutionally protected..." KATZ V. UNITED STATES, 389 US 347 (1967). "Uncontrolled search and seizure is one of the first and... | |
 | United States. Supreme Court, John Chandler Bancroft Davis, Henry Putzel, Henry C. Lind, Frank D. Wagner - 1974 - 1040 стор.
...argument. In Katz v. United States, supra, we said that the Fourth Amendment provides no protection for what "a person knowingly exposes to the public, even in his own home or office . . . ." 389 US, at 351. The physical characteristics of a person's voice, its tone and manner, as... | |
| |
What a person knowingly exposes to the public, even in his own home or office, is not a subject of Fourth Amendment protection. . . . But what he seeks to preserve as private, even in an area accessible to the public, may be constitutionally protected... 
