Lee v. Florida (1968)
Syllabus
933413Lee v. Florida — Syllabus
Court Documents
Dissenting Opinion
Black

United States Supreme Court

392 U.S. 378

Lee et al.  v.  Florida

Certiorari to the District Court of Appeal of Florida, Fourth District.

No. 174.  Argued: May 2, 1968. --- Decided: June 17, 1968

A four-party telephone line was installed in petitioner Lee's house, and shortly thereafter, by direction of the Orlando, Florida, police, a telephone in a neighboring house was connected to the same party line. The police attached equipment which permitted them to hear and record all conversations on the party line without lifting the telephone receiver. Recordings of conversations were introduced, over objection, at petitioners' trial for violation of state lottery laws. Petitioners were convicted and the state appellate court affirmed, saying "that there were no state or federal statutes applicable in Florida which would make wiretapping illegal and inadmissible in evidence...."


Held:

1. The conduct of the Orlando police clearly amounted to interception of petitioners' communications within the meaning of § 605 of the Federal Communications Act of 1934, which prohibits the interception and divulgence (conceded here) of any communication without the sender's authorization. Pp. 380-382.
2. The recordings of the illegally intercepted conversations were not admissible in evidence in the Florida courts in view of the express federal prohibition against divulgence of recordings so procured. Schwartz v. Texas, 344 U.S. 199, overruled. Pp. 382-387.

191 So. 2d 84, reversed.


Edward R. Kirkland argued the cause and filed a brief for petitioners.

Wallace E. Allbritton, Assistant Attorney General of Florida, argued the cause for respondent. With him on the brief was Earl Faircloth, Attorney General.


Notes

edit

This work is in the public domain in the United States because it is a work of the United States federal government (see 17 U.S.C. 105).

Public domainPublic domainfalsefalse