Note
Heading reenacted by L 2006, c 200, pt of §4.
Law Journals and Reviews
Hawaii's New Wiretap Law. 14 HBJ, no. 3, at 83 (1978).
The Lum Court and the First Amendment. 14 UH L. Rev. 395 (1992).
Case Notes
Warrantless recordation by party to conversation did not violate this part. 64 H. 659, 649 P.2d 346 (1982).
Provisions of this part and article I, §7 of state constitution not relevant to question of legality of electronic eavesdropping activities conducted in California. 83 H. 187, 925 P.2d 357 (1996).
§803-47 Reports concerning intercepted wire, oral, or electronic communications; reports concerning pen registers and trap and trace devices. (a) In January of each year, the attorney general and county prosecuting attorneys of this State shall report to the administrative director of the courts of this State and to the administrative office of the United States Courts:
(1) The fact that an order or extension was applied for;
(2) The kind of order or extension applied for;
(3) The fact that the order or extension was granted as applied for, was modified, or was denied;
(4) The period of interceptions authorized by the order, and the number and duration of any extensions of the order;
(5) The offense specified in the order or application, or extension of an order;
(6) The identity of the investigative or law enforcement officer and agency requesting the application and the person authorizing the request for application;
(7) The nature of the facilities from which or the place where communications were to be intercepted;
(8) A general description of the interceptions made under such order or extension, including:
(A) The approximate nature and frequency of incriminating communications intercepted;
(B) The approximate nature and frequency of other communications intercepted;
(C) The approximate number of persons whose communications were intercepted; and
(D) The approximate nature, amount, and cost of the personnel and other resources used in the interceptions;
(9) The number of arrests resulting from interceptions made under an order or extension of the order, and the offenses for which the arrests were made;
(10) The number of trials resulting from the interceptions;
(11) The number of motions to suppress made with respect to the interceptions and the number granted or denied;
(12) The number of convictions resulting from the interceptions and the offenses for which the convictions were obtained and a general assessment of the importance of the interceptions;
(13) The information required by paragraphs (2) through (6) of this subsection with respect to orders or extensions obtained in a preceding calendar year and not yet reported; and
(14) Other information required by the rules and regulations of the administrative office of the United States Courts.
(b) In March of each year the administrative director of the courts shall transmit to the legislature a full and complete report concerning the number of applications for orders authorizing or approving the interception of wire, oral, or electronic communications and the number of orders and extensions granted or denied during the preceding calendar year. The report shall include a summary and analysis of the data required to be filed with the administrative director of the courts by the attorney general and prosecuting attorneys.
(c) The attorney general, at least twenty days prior to the convening of each regular session, shall annually report to the legislature on the number of pen register orders and orders for trap and trace devices applied for by law enforcement agencies of the State. [L 1978, c 218, pt of §2; am L 1986, c 303, §7; am L 1989, c 164, §9; am L 2006, c 200, pt of §4]
Section: Previous 803-43 803-44 803-44.5 803-44.6 803-44.7 803-45 803-46 803-47 803-47.5 803-47.6 803-47.7 803-47.8 803-47.9 803-48 803-48.5 NextLast modified: October 27, 2016