◆ SpookStack

> second, where the installation is made after the person is actually in possession and occupying the promises.’ ~ "The evidence is clearly admissible if tha installation is made prior to the tine when the subjcct actually takes possession of the proparty. Cn the basis of the principles heretofore stated, it would scem also that the evidence should be. admissible even if the installation is made whiice the subject ds actually in possession and occupying the promises. i] ""4, Where the cxisting facilities within the prenmiscs are used merely through a ueans of rewiring tha same. It is neant by this that no actual micronhone ig installod and that the facilitics presently on the premises are used for this purpose. It will bo appreciated in this regard iz you will venture an opinion: first, where the sano is installed with peraission of the janitor, tanaser, or other person of possible authority; second, wnere an actual trespass is committed.’ "The answer applicable to case No. 3, just discussed, aiso governs the situation in case No. 4. It is undorstood that reviring does not involve any intorception of 4 conversation passing over a tolephone wire. "tS. Where an actual trespass is committed and a microphena installation is nade within the confines of the premises in question.' “On the basis of tho principles heretofore discussed, it vould scem that avidence so obtained should be admissible, althouzh no preciso case decided by the courts involving such a situation has been found. The basic principlo governing tho situation is tho one horotofore discussed, namely, that trespass not amounting to unlawful search and scizure