In U.S. v. White, involving incriminating statements heard by law enforcement because of warrantless electronic eavesdropping of defendant White's co-conspirator, the Supreme Court held that:
I. White had no reasonable expectation of privacy in his conversation with the co-conspirator.
II. live participant monitoring was reasonable under the Fourth Amendment, but
Electronic eavesdropping was not.
III. three-party bugging jeopardizes our sense of security and therefore was unreasonable.
IV. the use of government informants in the respondent's home violated the Fourth Amendment.

Question

Quizplus · Accepted Answer

The Supreme Court held that White had no reasonable expectation of privacy in his conversation with the co-conspirator, as the co-conspirator could have disclosed the conversation to law enforcement.

In US V White, Involving Incriminating Statements Heard by Law Enforcement Because