Legal Opinion
Commonwealth v. Rekasie
Supreme Court of Pennsylvania
Decided August 20, 2001No. 86 W.D. Appeal Docket 1999PublishedCited by 33 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION
CAPPY, Justice.
In this appeal, our court revisits the area of one party consensual wire interceptions. The sole issue before our court is whether Article I, Section 8 of the Pennsylvania Constitution requires the Commonwealth to obtain a determination of probable cause by a neutral, judicial authority before an agent of the Commonwealth may initiate a telephone call to an individual in his home and record that conversation. For the reasons that follow, we hold that Appellant Kirk Rekasie did not have a reasonable expectation that his telephone conversation would be free from consensual…
2Cases cited17 opinions
- Katz v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Smith v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- United States v. MillerSupreme Court of the United States · 1976
- United States v. WhiteSupreme Court of the United States · 1971
- Lopez v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1963
12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by33 opinions
- Commonwealth v. MillnerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2005
- Commonwealth v. DuncanSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
- Pennsylvania State EduCation Ass'n ex rel. Wilson v. Commonwealth, Department of Community & Economic DevelopmentSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2016
- Commonwealth v. MooreSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
- Office of the Lieutenant Governor v. MohnCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 2013
28 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.