Wiretap Order

A trial court must reevaluate its denial of a man’s request to inspect a wiretap order and intercepted communications, an appeals court in California ruled. The man was targeted by a wiretap in 2015 that was authorized by a judge in Riverside County who signed 17% of “all the wiretaps authorized by all the state and federal courts in the nation” in 2014. In the years since his calls were intercepted, the man was never charged with any crime relating to the wiretap.

RIVERSIDE, Calif. — A trial court must reevaluate its denial of a man’s request to inspect a wiretap order and intercepted communications, an appeals court in California ruled. The man was targeted by a wiretap in 2015 that was authorized by a judge in Riverside County who signed 17% of “all the wiretaps authorized by all the state and federal courts in the nation” in 2014. In the years since his calls were intercepted, the man was never charged with any crime relating to the wiretap.

Categories / Appeals, Civil Rights, Criminal, Government, Technology

Subscribe to Closing Arguments

Sign up for new weekly newsletter Closing Arguments to get the latest about ongoing trials, major litigation and hot cases and rulings in courthouses around the U.S. and the world.

Wiretap Order

Subscribe to Closing Arguments

Additional Reads