INCHOATE OFFENSES Part 6

ISSUANCE OF INTERCEPTION ORDER AND RELATED ORDERS

OFFENSES FOR WHICH INTERCEPTION ORDER MAY BE ISSUED.  

A judge of competent jurisdiction may issue an interception order only if the prosecutor applying for the order shows probable cause to believe that the interception will provide evidence of the commission of a felony or offense .

JUDICIAL DETERMINATIONS REQUIRED FOR ISSUANCE OF INTERCEPTION ORDER.  

– On receipt of an application the judge may issue an ex parte interception order, as requested or as modified, if the judge determines from the evidence submitted by the prosecutor that there is probable cause to believe that a person is committing, has committed, or is about to commit a particular offense, that particular communications concerning that offense will be obtained through the interception.

– Normal investigative procedures have been attempted and have failed or reasonably appear to be unlikely to succeed or to be too dangerous if attempted.

– There is probable cause to believe that the facilities from which or the place where the wire, oral, or electronic communications are to be intercepted is being used or is about to be used in connection with the commission of an offense or is leased to, listed in the name of, or commonly used by the person; and a covert entry is or is not necessary to properly and safely install the wiretapping, electronic surveillance, or eavesdropping equipment. 

CONTENTS OF INTERCEPTION ORDER.

An interception order must specify the identity of the person, if known, whose communications are to be intercepted; the nature and location of the communications facilities as to which or the place where authority to intercept is granted; a particular description of the type of communication sought to be intercepted and a statement of the particular offense to which the communication relates; the identity of the officer making the request and the identity of the prosecutor; the period during which the interception is authorized, including a statement of whether the interception will automatically terminate when the described communication is first obtained; and whether a covert entry or surreptitious entry is necessary to properly and safely install wiretapping, electronic surveillance, or eavesdropping equipment.

Each interception order and extension of that order must provide that the authorization to intercept be executed as soon as practicable, be conducted in a way that minimizes the interception of communications, and terminate on obtaining the authorized objective or within 30 days, whichever occurs sooner.

LIMITATION ON COVERT ENTRY.  

An interception order may not authorize a covert entry for the purpose of intercepting an oral communication unless the judge determines the premises into or onto which the covert entry is authorized or the person whose communications are to be obtained has been the subject of a pen register previously authorized in connection with the same investigation;

An interception order may not authorize a covert entry into a residence solely for the purpose of intercepting a wire or electronic communication.

AUTHORITY TO ISSUE CERTAIN ANCILLARY ORDERS.  

An interception order may include an order to install or use a pen register, ESN reader, trap and trace device, or mobile tracking device or similar equipment that combines the function of a pen register and trap and trace device or disclose a stored communication, information subject to an administrative subpoena, or information subject to access. 

ORDER TO THIRD PARTY TO ASSIST WITH EXECUTION OF INTERCEPTION ORDER. 

On request of the prosecutor applying for an interception order, the judge may issue a separate order directing a provider of a wire or electronic communications service, communication common carrier, landlord, custodian, or other person to provide to the prosecutor all information, facilities, and technical assistance necessary to accomplish the interception unobtrusively and with a minimum of interference with the services that the service provider, carrier, landlord, custodian, or other person is providing the person whose communications are to be intercepted.

A provider of a wire or electronic communications service, communication common carrier, landlord, custodian, or other person that provides facilities or technical assistance under an order is entitled to compensation, at the prevailing rates, by the prosecutor for reasonable expenses incurred in providing the facilities or assistance. 

DURATION OF INTERCEPTION ORDER.  

An interception order may not authorize the interception of a communication for a period that is longer than is necessary to achieve the objective of the authorization or exceeds 30 days.  

EXTENSION OF INTERCEPTION ORDER.  

A judge who issues an interception order may grant extensions of the order.

REPORT ON NEED FOR CONTINUED INTERCEPTION.  

An interception order may require reports to the judge who issued the order that show any progress toward achieving the authorized objective and the need for continued interception.

SUBSEQUENT CRIMINAL PROSECUTION RELATED TO INTERCEPTION ORDER.  

A judge who issues an interception order may not hear a criminal prosecution in which evidence derived from the interception may be used or the order may be an issue. 

As always, the best option is to contact Atlas Bail and go over available info and all the details. With our experience, knowledge and great customer service, we can have your loved ones back to you as soon as the law will allow us. From the moment you show up in our office we understand your need for guidance and help. The fact that a person is in jail is only the beginning of the process. Selecting AAA Atlas Bail is an important first step. With years of experience in our office, we most definitely will have the right answer for you. 

Share this post

Share on facebook
Share on google
Share on twitter
Share on linkedin
Share on pinterest
Share on print
Share on email