State v. Dye

The opinion of the court was delivered by

Francis, J.

Defendant Dye was convicted of bookmaking. The evidence from which the conviction resulted arose primarily from a wiretap of a telephone on the premises where Dye was employed. At the trial he challenged the admissibility of the wiretap product alleging that it was obtained in violation of the New Jersey Wiretapping & Electronic Surveillance Act, N. J. S. A. 2A:156A-1 et seq., and of the Eourth Amendment of the United States Constitution. After sentence an appeal was taken to the Appellate Division, which we certified prior to argument there.