Orlando Criminal Lawyer
call for a free

Brief Filed Emphasizing Importance of Geographical Limitations on Wiretaps


An amicus brief recently filed by the National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers with the U.S. Supreme Court highlights how important it is that our nation’s highest court recognizes the privacy-protecting limitations Congress placed on wiretapping.

While Title III of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Street Act (aka the Wiretap Act) allows wiretapping under some circumstances, the activity is subject to extremely restrictive requirements created in order to protect privacy interests.

What Is The Geographical Limitation On Legal Wiretapping?

Law enforcement officials cannot legally wiretap any cell phone they want. One of the important restrictions placed on this power applies to geographic limitations of the judge themselves: Judges can only authorize wiretapping for interceptions that occur within their districts. That means that the cell phone, the interception location, or both must be in their district in order for the judge’s order to be valid, and a judge could never allow a defendant’s phone to be tapped anywhere in the country.

Changes in Technology & the Importance of Safeguarding Privacy Rights

Congress placed these important restrictions in place with good reason: this massive invasion of privacy must yield something that is of use, and that intrusion into our private lives must be as limited as possible.

This is of particular concern when it comes to cell phones and similar technology, which was not around when the original laws allowing for limited wiretapping in order to protect privacy interests were put in place. For example, in 2016 alone, a reported 43 million conversations were intercepted; 93 percent of them from cell phones.

The information that these devices can convey goes above and beyond that which was intercepted when wiretapping was first legalized. Without upholding appropriate limitations and restrictions on wiretapping devices like these, prosecutors could pick and choose which courts would most likely grant them any wiretap approval that they seek.

What Happens When Law Enforcement Illegally Wiretaps?

Any evidence gathered from a deficient wiretap cannot effectively be introduced as evidence to be used against defendants in court. In other words, the evidence is suppressed because it fails to meet the requirements of Title III.

This is precisely what the amicus brief reminds the U.S. Supreme Court of; i.e. that the Court should reverse the judgments of the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit because courts and prosecutors should not be allowed to disregard the territorial limitation Congress placed in Title III.. 

Consult a Criminal Defense Lawyer

If you are facing criminal charges after your phone or any other device has been wiretapped, you need to speak with a zealous criminal defense lawyer right away.

The experienced lawyers of The Baez Law Firm represent clients in all criminal cases throughout Florida and Massachusetts. Contact us today to find out more.




  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • LinkedIn
  • Google+
Miami Office

Miami Office

40 SW 13th St, Suite 901
Miami, FL 33130
Office: 305-999-5100
Fax: 305-999-5111
Orlando Office

Orlando Office

23 South Osceola Avenue
Orlando, FL 32801
Office: 407-705-2626
Fax: 407-705-2625
Miami Office

Boston Office

6 Beacon Street, Suite 510
Boston, MA 02108
Office: 800-588-BAEZ
Orlando Office

Massachusetts Office

66 North 2nd Street
New Bedford, MA 02740
Office: 800-588-BAEZ

Email Us

Fields Marked * Are required

Captcha Image

DISCLAIMER: Completing and submitting this form or otherwise merely contacting The Baez Law Firm or any individual at the firm will not establish an attorney/client relationship. Our firm cannot represent you until we determine that there would be no conflict of interest and that we are otherwise able to accept representation of your case. Please do not send any information or documents until a formal attorney/client relationship has been established through an interview with an attorney and you have been given authorization in the form of an engagement letter with The Baez Law Firm. Any information or documents sent via this form or otherwise prior to your receipt of an engagement letter will not be treated as confidences, secrets, or protected information of any nature. Submitting information regarding your potential case will not bar The Baez Law Firm from representing or continuing to represent a person or entity whose interest are adverse to your in condition with your case.

DISCLAIMER: This website contains information about The Baez Law Firm that includes testimonial statements from persons who are familiar with the firm's services. The testimonials shown are not necessarily representative of every person's experience with us. Testimonials from every client are not provided. As no two situations or persons are identical, the facts and circumstances of your situation may differ from those for which testimonials are shown. This website also includes information about some of the past results that we have obtained for our clients. Not all results are provided, and the results shown are not necessarily representative of all results obtained by us. No two situation are exactly alike; every person's situation is unique and the outcome for each person depends on the individual facts.

The information on this website is for general information purposes only. Nothing on this site should be taken as legal advice for any individual case or situation. This information is not intended to create, and receipt or viewing does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship.
MileMark Media - Practice Growth Solutions

© 2015 - 2018 Baez Law Firm. All rights reserved.
This law firm website is managed by MileMark Media.

Contact Form Tab