Petitioner was convicted of transmitting wagering information by telephone across state lines. Evidence in this case was obtained by FBI agents placing an electronic listening device on a public telephone without a warrant. The Supreme Court held that Katz had an expectation of privacy in his phone call and that the activities of the FBI constituted an unreasonable search since they failed to obtain a warrant.
1. Summarize the facts in the Katz case.
2. Why did the Court rephrase the legal issues?
3. Explain the Court's decision in Katz.