Officers of the State of New York, in compliance with the Constitution and statutes of that state, but in direct violation of a federal statute, tapped a telephone belonging to a person suspected of certain felonies, intending to use the evidence obtained thereby against the suspect in a prospective state criminal prosecution. After having been indicted by a State Grand Jury, the accused began an action in Federal District Court for an injunction to enjoin a State District Attorney, a municipal Police Commissioner, and others from divulging the existence or contents of the conversations overheard, as well as the introduction of all evidence resulting from such wiretaps, in the accused's trial. That court denied the injunction. Pending an appeal to the Court of Appeals, the accused moved for a stay so as to halt proceedings in the state courts and preserve the status quo between the parties until final adjudication of his appeal. This relief was granted, but upon consideration of the appeal by the full court sitting en banc, the decision of the District Court was affirmed. The stay previously granted was continued, however, pending application by the accused to the United States Supreme Court for certiorari. The denial of the injunction has been just recently affirmed in a per curiam decision. This case presented the Court a situation somewhat different from any it had yet considered.
Allen L. Graves,
Injunction to Prevent Divulgence of Evidence Obtained by Wiretaps in State Criminal Prosecutions,
40 Neb. L. Rev. 529
Available at: http://digitalcommons.unl.edu/nlr/vol40/iss3/9