Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

State v. Minter

Supreme Court of New Jersey

Decided August 4, 1989Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partPollock, J.

This case requires the Court to decide whether tapes of intercepted telephone conversations seized by federal enforcement officials in compliance with The Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2510-21 (1970 & 1989 supp.) (the Federal Wiretap Act), are admissible in a New Jersey state proceeding when the federal agents did not comply with the requirements of the New Jersey Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Control Act, N.J.S.A. 2A-.156A-1 to -26 (the Act). The majority implicitly recognizes that it would be possible to interpret the New Jersey law as meaning…

2Cases cited20 opinions

  1. Katz v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  2. Elkins v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1960
  3. Berger v. New YorkSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  4. State v. NovembrinoSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1987
  5. Commonwealth v. VitelloMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1975

15 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API