Go to next caseOlmstead was convicted for the illegal sale of alcohol under the National Prohibition Act. Much of the evidence used against him was obtained through the use of an illegal wiretap placed on his phone. Olmstead argued to the Supreme Court that his Fourth Amendment rights allowed him a "reasonable expectation of privacy." The Court disagreed, stating that Olmstead intended "to project his voice to those quite outside...and that...nothing tangible was taken." This verdict was later overturned when, in 1934, the United States Congress enacted the Federal Communications Act. The Act prohibited the interception of any communications and the divulgence of the contents of intercepted communications. The Court then overturned the Olmstead decision, extending the exclusionary rule to include wiretapping in federal prosecutions.
* The content on this page and the pages to which it is linked are based on the information from Anatomy of a Murder: A Trip Through Our Nation's Legal Justice System.
