Record

Court opinion

1967-06-12

CourtListener (Free Law Project), text of the opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States

Berger v. New York, 388 U.S. 41 (1967)

Supreme Court decision of June 12, 1967 holding New York's permissive eavesdrop statute "too broad in its sweep" and so in violation of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments, reversing a conviction for conspiracy to bribe the Chairman of the State Liquor Authority.

Date: 1967-06-12
Kind: court-opinion
Source: CourtListener (Free Law Project), text of the opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States
Retrieved: 2026-10-12
Docket: 388 U.S. 41 (1967), No. 615
Rights: Opinion of the Supreme Court of the United States, a federal work in the public domain under 17 U.S.C. § 105. CourtListener (Free Law Project) hosts the text; it is not the source institution.

Decided June 12, 1967; No. 615. Berger was convicted of conspiracy to bribe the Chairman of the New York State Liquor Authority on the basis of tape recordings made under a court order issued under New York’s permissive eavesdrop statute.

The Court held: “We have concluded that the language of New York’s statute is too broad in its sweep resulting in a trespassory intrusion into a constitutionally protected area and is, therefore, violative of the Fourth and Fourteenth Amendments.” (388 U.S. at 44.) The conviction was reversed. CourtListener lists separate opinions by Justices Douglas and Stewart concurring and by Justices Black, Harlan and White dissenting.

The case concerned liquor-license bribery in New York, not a named crime family. It was decided a year before Title III of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, filed separately.

itemKatz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967)Supreme Court decision of December 18, 1967 holding that FBI recording of a gambler's calls from a public telephone booth was a search and seizure under the Fourth Amendment, and that the trespass doctrine of Olmstead was no longer controlling.itemOmnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, Title III: Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance (Public Law 90-351), 82 Stat. 211Title III of the 1968 Act added chapter 119 to title 18: it prohibited private interception of wire and oral communications and set up court-ordered interception for listed offenses. Its findings state: "Organized criminals make extensive use of wire and oral communications in their criminal activities."