Arreguin

United States v. Arreguin

Good Law
277 F. Supp. 2d 1057·2003 WL 21990984·2003 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 13683
United States District Court, Eastern District of CaliforniaAugust 7, 2003CR S-02-104 LKKCalifornia3,784 words

Opinion

Opinion

Karlton, J.

ORDER

Defendants in this federal criminal prosecution move for discovery concerning an affidavit filed in support of a state-authorized wiretap (Orange County wiretap # 02-01) and the investigation reports concerning the subject of that wiretap, Reyna-Madrigal, and the subject of an earlier wiretap, Mora. Because the state wiretap information was used to obtain a further wiretap issued by - this court, defendants seek discovery in order to attack those underlying wiretaps. At issue is whether defendants’ request may be granted in light of the government’s privilege to keep confidential the identity of its informants.

Before discussing the parties’ arguments, I briefly set out the statutory scheme of Title III of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968, under which wiretaps are available. In particular, I focus on the provisions that relate to disclosing or using the contents of, or the underlying application for, a wiretap.

I.

TITLE III DISCLOSURE PROVISIONS

Title III prohibits the interception of wire or oral communication “[e]xcept as otherwise specifically provided in this chapter ... 18 U.S.C. § 2511 . It also prohibits the use and disclosure of intercepted…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.