United States v. Mario Gigante
Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
1Opinion of the Court
IRVING R. KAUFMAN, Chief Judge:
Justice Brandéis tellingly observed almost 50 years ago that “writs of assistance and general warrants are but puny instruments of tyranny and oppression when compared with wire tapping.” Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438, 476, 48 S.Ct. .564, 571, 72 L.Ed. 944 (1928) (dissenting). Mindful of this potential danger, Congress, in enacting Title III of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, 18 U.S.C. § 2510 et seq., prescribed specific and detailed procedures to ensure careful judicial scrutiny of the conduct of electronic surveillance and the…
2Cases cited13 opinions
- Olmstead v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1928
- United States v. GiordanoSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- United States v. ChavezSupreme Court of the United States · 1974
- Coenen v. R. W. Pressprich & Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1972
- United States v. Joseph ManfrediCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1973
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by66 opinions
- United States v. Thomas Fury and John QuinnCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1977
- United States v. Ojeda RiosSupreme Court of the United States · 1990
- State v. BursteinSupreme Court of New Jersey · 1981
- United States v. Antonio Cruz Vazquez, Benito Luis Cortina, Antonio Gonzalez, Andres Rene Rappard, and Jose De La Fe-QuintasCourt of Appeals for the Second Circuit · 1979
- United States v. John T. RobinsonCourt of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit · 1983
61 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.