Roy Olmstead Case Summary

Roy Olmstead was tried and convicted of being in violation of the national prohibition Act which prohibited the manufacture and distribution of alcohol in the US. Federal agents were able to make a substantial case against Roy Olmstead through the use of evidence garnered through judicial unapproved wiretaps placed on his phone line between his home and place of business. Olmstead appealed his guilty verdict claiming that the government gained evidence through actions which violated his 4th Amendment guarantees which protect against unreasonable search and seizures as well as violated his 5th Amendment guarantees against testifying against yourself. Olmstead was found guilty on appeal in the US appellate court and the case was moved to the US …show more content…
Due to the issue with the garnering of the evidence in the case, the 5th Amendment cannot be applied to this case without first proving the 4th Amendment had been violated. The general purpose of the 4th Amendment was to protect citizens from being subjected to governmental searches of their house and their physical possessions against their will. The protection of the 4th Amendment only extends to protecting the physical domains of citizens property from being subjected to search and seizures. The evidence obtained against Roy Olmstead was gathered through the sense of hearing which prevented the need to physically enter upon or handle any of Olmstead’s property. Citizens who used telephones were projecting their voices to entities outside of their home domain and therefore not within protection of the 4th Amendment. Rather than extending the boundaries of the 4th amendment to protect the secrecy of telephones messages, congress needs to enact legislation if they want to prevent the federal government from using wiretaps as means of evidence in