TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

Bryant Piledge Long v. United States

Bryant Piledge LONG, Appellant, v. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee

Long v. United States, 387 F.2d 377 (5th Cir. 1968)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit · U.S. Courts of Appeals
Decided
March 4, 1968
Docket
No. 24224_1
Judges
Jones, Wisdom, Dyer
Citations
387 F.2d 377

Opinion — Per Curiam

PER CURIAM:

The defendant-appellant, Bryant Long, was convicted for unlawfully selling seven gallons of whiskey in unstamped containers, in violation of 26 U.S.C. § 5604 (a) (1). The United States introduced, over the defendant’s objections, evidence of conversations between Long and a government agent obtained through the use of electronic transmitting and receiving devices. A microphone strapped to the agent transmitted the conversations to other agents. Long contends that the use of electronic eavesdropping devices is unconstitutional and that evidence resulting from such devices is inadmissible.

There is no merit to Long’s contention. Lopez v. United States, 1963, 373 U.S. 427 , 83 S.Ct. 1381 , 10 L.Ed.2d 462 ; On Lee v. United States, 1952, 343 U.S. 747 , 72 S.Ct. 967 , 96 L.Ed. 1270 ; Goldman v. United States, 1942, 316 U.S. 129 , 62 S.Ct. 993 , 86 L.Ed. 1322 ; Olmstead v. United States, 1928, 277 U.S. 438 , 48 S.Ct. 564 , 72 L.Ed. 944 ; and Beatty v. United States, 5 Cir. 1967, 377 F.2d 181 . In Silverman v. United States, 1961, 365 U.S. 505 , 81 S.Ct. 679 , 5 L.Ed.2d 734 , the Supreme Court explicitly pointed out that On Lee, Goldman, and Olmstead were still applicable except where “the eavesdropping was accomplished by means of an unauthorized physical penetration into the premises occupied by the petitioners”. See also Katz v. United States, 9 Cir. 1967, 369 F.2d 130 , cert. granted, 386 U.S. 954 , 87 S.Ct. 1021 , 18 L.Ed.2d 102 . No physical “intrusion” or “penetration” was involved in this case. See Jones v. United States, 5 Cir. 1964, 339 F.2d 419 . The judgment is affirmed.

1

1

. After entry but before publication of the above opinion in this ease the Supreme Court reversed Katz v. United States, holding that the “trespass” doctrine enunciated in Olmstead and Goldman “can no longer be regarded as controlling.” 389 U.S. 347, 353 , 88 S.Ct. 507, 512 , 19 L.Ed.2d 576, 583 (Dec. 18, 1967).

Lopez and Osborn v. United States, 1967, 385 U.S. 323 , 87 S.Ct. 429 , 17 L.Ed.2d 394 , involving tape recordings of incriminating conversation where the parties recording the conversations were agents for the government, are still viable, however. So also are On Lee, a case factually almost identical to the case before us, and Hester v. United States, 1924, 265 U.S. 57 , 44 S.Ct. 445 , 68 L.Ed. 898 , similar to this case but involving no electronic device. On the basis of these decisions our judgment affirming Long’s conviction must stand.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1968: 21969: 41971: 119682026peak 1969 · 4

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. United States v. White401 U.S. 745 (1971)
  2. Joseph Daniel Holt v. United States404 F.2d 914 (10th Cir. 1969)
  3. Mortimer Norman Koran v. United States408 F.2d 1321 (5th Cir. 1969)
  4. Andrew J. Harris v. United States400 F.2d 264 (5th Cir. 1968)
  5. Parnell v. State218 So. 2d 535 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1969)
  6. State v. Wright444 P.2d 676 (Wash. 1968)

Most recent

  1. United States v. White401 U.S. 745 (1971)
  2. United States v. Long304 F. Supp. 81 (M.D. Ala. 1969)
  3. Mortimer Norman Koran v. United States408 F.2d 1321 (5th Cir. 1969)
  4. Joseph Daniel Holt v. United States404 F.2d 914 (10th Cir. 1969)
  5. Parnell v. State218 So. 2d 535 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1969)
  6. Andrew J. Harris v. United States400 F.2d 264 (5th Cir. 1968)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 12

DepthCaseCited by
Olmstead v. United States, 277 U.S. 438 (1928) 1,670
Goldman v. United States, 316 U.S. 129 (1942) 369
Katz v. United States, 389 U.S. 347 (1967) 10,783
Silverman v. United States, 365 U.S. 505 (1961) 1,029
Hester v. United States, 265 U.S. 57 (1924) 974
Lopez v. United States, 373 U.S. 427 (1963) 782
Osborn v. United States, 385 U.S. 323 (1967) 330
Lee v. United States, 343 U.S. 747 (1952) 488
Beatty v. United States, 377 F.2d 181 (5th Cir. 1967) 47
Snyder Bros. Co. v. United States, 386 U.S. 956 (1967) 27
Katz v. United States, 369 F.2d 130 (9th Cir. 1967) 13
Jones v. United States, 339 F.2d 419 (5th Cir. 1965) 2

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list