- 41 -
2518(10)(a) provides the following three grounds for a
motion to suppress:
(i) the communication was unlawfully
intercepted;
(ii) the order of authorization or approval
under which it was intercepted is insufficient
on its face; or
(iii) the interception was not made in conformity
with the order of authorization or approval.
In reviewing the relationship of those provisions, 18
U.S.C. sections 2515 and 2518(10)(a), the Supreme Court
held in United States v. Giordano, 416 U.S. 505 (1974),
and United States v. Chavez, 416 U.S. 562 (1974), that
"(not) every failure to comply fully with any requirement
provided in Title III would render the interception of
wire or oral communications 'unlawful.'" United States v.
Donovan, 429 U.S. 413, 433 (1977) (quoting United States v.
Chavez, supra at 574-575). According to the Supreme Court:
suppression is required only for a "failure to
satisfy any of those statutory requirements
that directly and substantially implement the
congressional intention to limit the use of
intercept procedures to those situations clearly
calling for the employment of this extraordinary
investigative device."
Id. at 433-434 (quoting United States v. Giordano, supra at
527).
Page: Previous 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011