Supreme Court of the United States · Official docket →
Robert J. Rice v. United States
Paid petition · United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, No. 17-1102 · judgment November 16, 2017
Before the decision, well below the 4.1% base rate, with no standout signals pointing toward a grant.
Question presented
The 1968 federal Wiretap Act, 18 U.S.C. §§ 2510– 2522, as amended by the 1986 Electronic Communications Privacy Act (collectively, “the Act”), provides for “suppression” of illegally seized “wire” and “oral” communications but not of illegally seized “electronic” communications. See id. §§ 2515, 2518(10)(a), 2518(10)(c). Yet the Act also provides that witnesses must not “disclose” illegally seized “electronic” communications through testimony during a trial. Id. §§ 2511(1)(c), 2517(3). Does the Wiretap Act, as amended, require courts to bar trial testimony that would disclose illegally seized electronic communications?
Counsel of record
For petitioner
Peter Goldberger
For respondent
Noel John Francisco
Jones Day
Proceedings
- May 21 2018Petition DENIED.
- May 01 2018DISTRIBUTED for Conference of 5/17/2018.
- Apr 26 2018Waiver of right of respondent United States to respond filed.
- Apr 13 2018Petition for a writ of certiorari filed. (Response due May 17, 2018)
- Mar 09 2018Application (17A821) granted by Justice Alito extending the time to file until April 15, 2018.
- Mar 02 2018Application (17A821) to extend further the time from March 16, 2018 to April 15, 2018, submitted to Justice Alito.
- Feb 06 2018Application (17A821) granted by Justice Alito extending the time to file until March 16, 2018.
- Feb 01 2018Application (17A821) to extend the time to file a petition for a writ of certiorari from February 14, 2018 to March 16, 2018, submitted to Justice Alito.