Pennsylvania Code & Bulletin
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA

• No statutes or acts will be found at this website.

The Pennsylvania Code website reflects the Pennsylvania Code changes effective through 54 Pa.B. 2336 (April 27, 2024).

210 Pa. Code Rule 3537. Content of Application—Target Specific Wiretaps.

Rule 3537. Content of Application—Target Specific Wiretaps.

 An application for a target specific wiretap pursuant to 18 Pa.C.S. §  5712.1 that does not comply with 18 Pa.C.S. §  5712(a)(3) and/or 18 Pa.C.S. §  5709(3)(iv) and (v), shall set forth:

 A.  In the case of oral communications:

   1.  a full and complete statement as to why specification is not practical and identifies the person committing the offense and whose communications are to be intercepted; and

   2.  a request that the Assigned Judge find that specification is not practical.

 B.  In the case of wire or electronic communications:

   1.  the identity of the person believed to be committing the offense and whose communications are to be intercepted, and the facts showing there is probable cause to believe that the person’s actions could have the effect of thwarting interception by changing facilities or devices.

   2.  a request that the Assigned Judge find that the purpose for the target specific order has been adequately shown.

 C.  In the event the affiant seeks a supplementary order for a target specific wiretap, such application shall contain:

   1.  The identity of the investigative or law enforcement officers or agency to whom the authority to intercept wire, electronic, or oral communication is given, and the name and official identity of the Applicant.

   2.  The identity of or a particular description of the person, if known, whose communications are to be intercepted.

   3.  The period of time during which the interception is authorized, including a statement as to whether or not the interception shall automatically terminate when the described communication has been first obtained.

   4.  The facts supporting a showing of reasonable suspicion that the target of the original order has in fact changed communications devices or facilities.

   5.  The facts supporting a showing of reasonable suspicion that the target of the original order is likely to use the additional facility or device or place for criminal purposes similar to or related to those specified in the original order.

Source

   The provisions of this Rule 3537 adopted November 24, 2020, effective immediately, 50 Pa.B. 6994.



No part of the information on this site may be reproduced for profit or sold for profit.


This material has been drawn directly from the official Pennsylvania Code full text database. Due to the limitations of HTML or differences in display capabilities of different browsers, this version may differ slightly from the official printed version.