Capra v. United States

How later courts describe this case

• requiring suppression of conversations of party who was neither named in order nor conversing with named party, when order permitted only “the interception of telephonic communications of [named suspect] with co-conspirators, accomplices and agents”; id., 273
• "too brief a period for an eavesdropper even with experience to identify the caller and characterize the conversation."
• effect on commerce found where payment of $150 was extorted by local official from tavern owner who purchased liquor from state distributors who in turn purchased liquor interstate
• when police are merely assisting a private party who has authority to search and a legitimate need to do so, courts are reluctant to exclude the resulting evidence
• two minutes is “too brief a period for an eavesdropper even with experience to identify the caller and characterize the conversation”
• extortion from potential licensee by liquor license clerk affects future commerce of tavern
• “when police are merely assisting a private party, who has au thority to search and a legitimate need to do so, ... courts are reluctant to exclude resulting evidence”
• "when police are merely assisting a private party, who has authority to search and a legitimate need to do so, ... courts are reluctant to exclude resulting evidence"