- 42 -
Title 18 U.S.C. section 2517 deals with the use and
disclosure of intercepted wire or oral communications in
specified circumstances. S. Rept. 1097, supra reprinted
in 1968 U.S.C.C.A.N. 2188. Therefore, a violation of
18 U.S.C. section 2517 would not seem to implicate
the suppression remedy specified in 18 U.S.C. section
2518(10)(a) which applies to unlawful interceptions. Based
upon this reasoning, a number of courts have held that
suppression under 18 U.S.C. section 2515 is not a remedy
for violation of 18 U.S.C. section 2517. E.g., United
States v. Williams, 124 F.3d 411, 426-427 (3d Cir. 1997);
United States v. Barnes, 47 F.3d 963, 965 (8th Cir. 1995);
United States v. Davis, 780 F.2d 838, 845-846 (10th Cir.
1985); United States v. Cardall, 773 F.2d 1128, 1133-1134
(10th Cir. 1985); Resha v. United States, 767 F.2d 285,
287-288 (6th Cir. 1985); United States v. Horton, 601 F.2d
319, 324 (7th Cir. 1979); United States v. Vento, 533 F.2d
838, 855 (3d Cir. 1976); United States v. Iannelli, 477
F.2d 999, 1001 (3d Cir. 1973), affd. on other grounds 420
U.S. 770 (1975); United States v. Aloi, 449 F. Supp. 698,
717 (E.D.N.Y. 1977). According to these courts, the remedy
for an unauthorized disclosure is found in 18 U.S.C.
section 2520 which provides a civil action for damages to
Page: Previous 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011