State ex rel. Ohio Bell Telephone Co. v. Williams
Ohio Supreme Court
1Opinion of the CourtLocher, J.
The central issue before this court is whether the Court of Common Pleas properly directed the telephone company, a non-party to an ex parte hearing, to aid law enforcement officials with technical assistance necessary for the implementation of a pen register to investigate a continual course of alleged criminal activity, which there was probable cause to believe was being committed over telephone lines owned, operated and exclusively controlled by appellant.1
A pen register only records the number dialed on a particular telephone. The United States Supreme Court, in describing the mechanics…
2Cases cited9 opinions
- Katz v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
- Smith v. MarylandSupreme Court of the United States · 1979
- United States v. New York Telephone Co.Supreme Court of the United States · 1977
- Zurcher v. Stanford DailySupreme Court of the United States · 1978
- Osborn v. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
4 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by11 opinions
- Richardson v. StateCourt of Criminal Appeals of Texas · 1993
- State v. ValenzuelaSupreme Court of New Hampshire · 1987
- State ex rel. Thomas v. McGinty (Slip Opinion)Ohio Supreme Court · 2020
- Richardson v. State, Texas Court of Appeals, 7th District (Amarillo)1992
- State ex rel. Parma Cty. Gen. Hosp. v. O'DonnellOhio Court of Appeals · 2013
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.