Commonwealth v. Bloom
Massachusetts Appeals Court
1Opinion of the Court
The defendant was the subject of clandestine observation by the Barnsta-ble police in a public rest room. Prosecuted under G. L. c. 272, § 35, he moved for pretrial suppression of the evidence obtained by those observations . The judge allowed the motion, and the Commonwealth has appealed.
*952The cases on this subject apply, without perfect consistency, principles enunciated in Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967), which held that use of an electronic listening device attached to the outside of a public phone booth constituted a search within the meaning of the Fourth Amendment of the…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Katz v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- People v. TriggsCalifornia Supreme Court · 1973
- Buchanan v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1971
- State v. HoltOregon Supreme Court · 1981
- State v. BryantSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1970
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Commonwealth v. CabralMassachusetts Appeals Court · 2007
- State of Iowa v. Paul Andrew MonahanCourt of Appeals of Iowa · 2018