Court Opinion

ID: 9687003
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-24 16:13:32.367386+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T09:45:11.428914
License: Public Domain

Coleman, J.
(concurring). I agree that the Court of Appeals should be affirmed. The police conduct does not warrant suppressing the evidence. They committed no illegal act. They had probable cause *211to investigate; they had probable cause to enter the room; they had probable cause to arrest defendant and seize the evidence.
Much has been written about the switchboard operator, Mrs. Auslander. For purposes of this case, it is not important whether she is criminally or civilly liable. What is important, as Judge Quinn noted for the Court of Appeals, is that she "was a private individual; she had no connection with the police, nor was her monitoring of the telephone conversation * * * authorized by any police agency”. Also, even if her conduct violated a statute, defendant has not demonstrated that he has standing to challenge that violation.
Ryan, J., concurred with Coleman, J.