Document: 370 U.S. 139 82 S.Ct. 1218 8 L.Ed.2d 384 Harry LANZA, Petitioner,v.STATE OF NEW YORK. No. 236. Argued April 2, 1962. Decided June 4, Leo Pfeffer and Jacob D. Fuchsberg, New York City, for petitioner. H. Richard Uviller, respondent. Mr. Justice STEWART delivered the opinion of Court. 1 On February 13, 1957, petitioner paid a visit to his brother, who was then confined in jail. The two conversed room at jail set aside such visits. Six days later petitioner's brother released from custody by order one member State Parole Commission, under rather unusual circumstances.1 This prompted committee Legislature hold an investigation possible corruption state parole system.2 2 During course committee's investigation, called testify. He appeared, accompanied counsel. After granting immunity prosecution, as permitted law,3 directed him answer several questions. For refusing these questions indicted, tried convicted provision criminal law York.4 His conviction affirmed on review courts.5 We granted certiorari, 368 918, 239, 7 134, consider claim that he could not constitutionally be punished put legislative committee, because conversation had with been electronically intercepted recorded officials State, transcript furnished basis reasons which follow, we this constitutional is valid, accordingly affirm judgment before us. 3 record does make clear precise circumstances between overheard transcribed. concedes, however, electronic device installed Westchester County Jail where without their knowledge thereby transcribed officials, hands when summoned 4 has questioned power conduct into whether system being administered honestly evenhandedly, nor good faith or propriety particular gave rise present case. argument simply interception violation those principles Fourth Amendment have found recognition Due Process Clause Fourteenth, it impermissible use interrogating him, therefore denied due process convicting questions.6 5 specifically insures 'right people secure persons, houses, papers, effects, against unreasonable searches seizures,' federal officers. may take settled Fourteenth gives like protection any State. Mapp v. Ohio, 367 643, 81 1684, 6 1081; Elkins United States, 364 206, 80 1437, 1669; Wolf Colorado, 338 25, 69 1359, 93 L.Ed. 1782. thus necessarily begins assumptions: visitors' public protected area, surreptitious eavesdropping certain amount search seizure. As second there can no doubt. Court through years taken literal mechanical approach question what constitute seizure.7 And recently last Term held officers, accomplished physical intrusion wall house, violated rights occupants. Silverman 365 505, 679, 734. But say equivalent man's 'house' place seizure person, best novel argument. To sure, far niggardly construing scope protection. A business office area,8 so store.9 hotel room, eyes Amendment, become person's 'house,'10 so, course, apartment.11 An automobile unreasonably searched.12 Neither occupied taxicab.13 Yet, attempting either define predict ultimate protection, obvious shares none attributes privacy home, automobile, office, room. In prison, official surveillance traditionally day.14 Though assumed even jail, perhaps especially there, relationships endowed particularized confidentiality must continue receive unceasing protection,15 claimed special relationship here. if accept premise area immunized Constitution seizure, though side standing complain,16 would still carry beyond decision yet rendered. case us bears resemblance cases Leyra Denno, 347 556, 74 716, 98 948, attempted evidence trial confession elicited trickery defendant while See also Spano York, 360 315, 79 1202, 1265. do here introduction unconstitutionally seized, 1081. Rochin California, 342 165, 72 205, 96 183. Nor actually offered procured gained unlawfully obtained—the 'fruit poisonous tree.' Cf. Nardone 308 338, 60 266, 84 307. 9 Here ever introduced prosecution Rather, willfully pertinent duly constituted authorized after having given prosecution. they related other completely unprecedented step. 10 disposition case, demand consideration step might required. all doubtful issues should resolved favor, conclusively shows least asked were way conversation. whom talked February, about releasing parole.17 describe efforts made assist obtaining brother's release.18 Not only apparent face dependent upon but counsel unequivocally testified trial.19 Costello 265, 279—280, 534, 541, 542, 551. Refusal fully supports modified courts.20 Whitfield 297 431, 438, 56 532, 778. 11 Moreover, contains supposing testify, possession conversation—assuming, arguendo, attenuated connection help supra. Indeed, reasonable infer interrogated existed. knew suspicious surrounding release brother.21 three visitors during stay jail.22 independent information occasioned interrogation. short, conclude asserted whatever its merits, tendered record. 12 Affirmed. 13 FRANKFURTER took part 14 WHITE 15 HARLAN, concurring. 16 I understand anything Court's suggest 'incorporates' provisions Fourth, 'liberty' assured is, respect 'privacy,' coextensive protections afforded Fourth. premise, join opinion. 17 Memorandum Chief WARREN. 18 agree BRENNAN courts comes resting firmly ground memorandum However, departs our practice reach necessary decision, deem appropriate add few words. 19 Unquestionably, decides since Committee conversation, refusal alone 'fully courts.' Ante, U.S., p. 146, S.Ct., 1222. Despite fact holding deprives jurisdiction intimate views other, more serious problems dimension presented record, Herb Pitcairn, 324 117, 65 459, 89 789; Enterprise Irrigation District Farmers Mutual Canal Co., 243 157, 37 318, 61 644; Murdock Memphis, 20 Wall. 590, 22 429, warrant dismissing writ improvidently granted, Benz Thruway Authority, 369 147, 674, 634; Atchley 366 207, 1051, 233, undertakes, characterizes it, 'gratuitous exposition' difficult originally thought decision. These expressions dicta are form lead misunderstanding confusion future cases. Such dicta, written decisions, unfortunate turning up digests decisions lower courts; often quoted evidencing considered Court, intention writer. am expressing my separately believe particularly regrettable depart normal Appeals, highest court split 4—3 result reached below. And, did write full announcing cannot tell intended decide them. Its remittitur unconvincing determining rest ground. What makes action singularly courts, uniformly condemned deplorable. Appellate Division termed 'reprehensible offensive,' People Lanza, App.Div.2d 199 N.Y.S.2d 598, 601; earlier 'atrocious inexcusable,' Lanza Joint Legislative Committee, 531, 533, 162 467, 470; 'flagrant unprecedented,' Matter Reuter, 252, 255, 164 538. Appeals characterized 'gross wrong,' N.Y.2d 92, 101, 9, 16, 143 N.E.2d 772, 777 (dissenting opinion), effort justify excuse action, contrary himself 'repulsive repugnant,' ibid. Governor unchecked 'unwholesome dangerous,' McKinney's 1958 Session Laws 1837; Chairman Privacy Communications incident 'deplorable' reported 'brought forth storm protest lawyers, some previously audibly concerned (with) * protect people's right privacy.' Report Communications, Document (1958) 25. It judge prisoner bail able consult attorney, feel confident lawyers eavesdropping. Comment, 27 Fordham L.Rev. 390, 394, n. 35. most striking indication degree shocked enactment Article 73 Penal Law making felony did. finally Supreme reduced bizarre sentence ten contempt year. 21 seems me puts imprimatur universally reproached every branch government arose, invite lawlessness which, long run, harmful society than individual contumacy. DOUGLAS concur 23 BRENNAN, THE CHIEF JUSTICE join. 24 gratuitous exposition grave confessedly tenor wholly unnecessary comments sufficiently ominous strongest emphasis abbreviated seven participate fewer five will invasion operate benefit persons—whether inmates visitors—inside lacks challenge secret conversations sufficient possessory interest premises, applied testimonial compulsion imposed solely unconstitutional 25 counts failure each number committee. appeal, judgment, identical sentences run consecutively, provide count concurrently. shows, affirmatively rebuttal, conceived propounded independently claims infringed rights; nothing contention infringement. 26 Under circumstances, adequately supported law. occasion indictment sustained another count.1 Since see below—which unelucidated opinion—is maintainable adequate, ground, forbear further case; for, light clearly established law, sought exercise futility.2 event, historic abide clarification below 'that indulge needless dissertations law.' Minnesota National Tea 309 551, 557, 676, 920. mean, seek taxes credulity suppose disagree majority free taint, own doctrine requires affirmance. somehow disregard past limited accordance 'the rule, frequently stated court, containing counts, verdict guilty each, good, itself support judgment.' 28 While ultimately arguable proper dismiss certiorari granted. 634;3 Fox Film Corp. Muller, 296 183, 158. event reaches it. Four officers concurred report finding 'not fit subject restoration parole.' endorsed superiors Parole. Shortly receiving recommendations Commission ordered released. Government Operations, created 1955. 'full authority investigate, inquire examine management affairs department, board, bureau, commission state, relation thereto *.' investigate administration local laws detection prevention unsound, improper corrupt practices therewith.' Law, Consol.Laws, c. 40, §§ 381, 584, 2447. § 1330: 'A person house legislature thereof summon witnesses, wilfully refuses sworn affirmed, material question, produce notice books, documents control, misdemeanor.' directing terms served 598. further, committed single crime various 895, 216 706, 175 833. passed claim, based amended follows: 'Upon appeal herein viz.: Defendant argued imposition penal sanctions deprived liberty Amendment. defendant's violated.' Silverthorne Lumber Co. 251 385, 40 182, 64 319; Zap 328 624, 66 1277, 90 1477; cf. Irvine 128, 132, 382, 561; Nueslein Columbia, App.D.C. 85, 115 F.2d 690; McGinnis Cir., 227 Gouled 255 298, 41 261, 647. Amos 313, 654; Davis 582, 1256, 1453. Lustig 74, 1372, 1819; States Jeffers, 48, 93, 59. Jones 362 257, 725, 697. Gambino 275 310, 48 137, 293; Carroll 267 45 280, 543; Brinegar 160, 1302, 1879; Henry 361 98, 168, 134. Rios 253, 1431, 1688. N.Y.Correction 43, 500 c provides, part: 'Convicts shall allowed converse except presence keeper.' N.Y. Correction, Regulations Management Jails (Revised 1953 ed.), provide, 'All parts searched contraband. thorough packages prevent forbidden articles smuggled kept minimum. Saws secreted bananas, soles shoes, peaks caps, drugs cap visors, postage stamps letters, cigars ways. Constant vigilance your safe. 'Cells systematically materials serve weapon medium self-destruction escape. Razor blades small easily concealed. 'The carefully supervised passing weapons, tools, drugs, liquor 'In jails booth provided, safe-keeping prisoners, crimes, insured booths used Where booths, prisoners corridors jailer's visits closely supervised. Experience shown laxity supervising searching resulted escapes, assaults officer breaches discipline.' affirming 467; 534; Coplon U.S.App.D.C. 103, 191 749. 'Mr. please name anybody you spoke month 1957 Joseph Lanza.' 'On 5, arrested returned prison charged parole. Tell please, extended 'Q. You gather tapes predicate Bauman? A. said say, Direnzo, well previous tapes. sure that? Yes.' note 5. 1. others wife lawyer. Faden, 271 435, 584; Cummins, 209 283, 103 N.E. 169; Hope People, 83 418; Davis, 95. That Hirabayashi 320 81, 63 1375, 1378, 87 1774. conviction, pass because, cause concurrently, sustain *. 444 (445), 587.' 319, 603. committed, re-examine 'It crimes enter duration imposed.' 897, Compare Bachtel Wilson, 204 36, 243, 51 357, dismissed error said, 245: 'Before pronounce (the below) conflict Federal appear therewith, possibly, probably, (that statute construction render constitutional), that, view silence supreme justified assuming (did construe statute).' Benz, here, reciting wit: 'Whether plaintiff just compensation clause Amendment.' Notwithstanding representation, concluded 'decided than' relating jurisdiction. entirely consistent Honeyman Hanan, 300 14, 18—19, 57 350, 352, 476: certificate statement controlling. aid examination avail foreclose inquiry duty import otherwise fails present.' supra, 302 375, 58 273, 312, illustrate, pursuit matter suspicions aroused disclose court's mean first glance, say. recited: 'Defendant wrote opinion, understood 'affirmance merely adoption Division, reasoning adopted.' Carmody's Practice (7th ed. 1956) 678. Commissioner Public Welfare Jackson, 265 440, 441, 193 262; Soderman Stone Bar Associates, Inc., 208 Misc. 864, 867, 146 tell, 'constitutional violated' untainted conviction.

Category: 0