Skip to content
Sullivan | Simon, LLC
  • HOME
  • ABOUT US
  • OPINIONS
  • ARTICLES
  • GHOSTWRITING
  • CONTACT

Commonwealth v. Byrd

November 3, 2020July 29, 2020

The Pennsylvania Supreme Court held that the recording on the jail phone warning the defendant’s conversation “may be monitored or recorded,” and that he spoke on the phone after the recorded warning, satisfied the mutual consent exception to the Wiretap Act.

BYRD

Categories Pennsylvania Supreme Court Tags #Suppression, #WiretapAct
Post navigation
Lowman v. Unemployment Bd. of Review
Commonwealth v. Reid

STAY INFORMED

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Tags

#1stAmendment #4thAmendment #1983 #AdministrativeLaw #AppellateLaw #AppellateProcedure #Arbitration #AttorneyFees #CivilLaw #CivPro #ClassAction #Contracts #CriminalLaw #CrimPro #Divorce #DueProcess #DUI #DWI #EmploymentLaw #Evidence #ExpertTestimony #FamilyLaw #Habeas #Immigration #IneffectiveAssistance #InsuranceDispute #Jurisdiction #MedMal #MegansLaw #Negligence #PCRA #PersonalInjury #Preemption #RealEstateLaw #RealProperty #Search&Seizure #Sentencing #SORNA #Standing #StatutoryInterpretation #Sufficiency #SummaryJudgment #Suppression #Torts #Waiver

Recent Posts

  • United States v. Heatherly
  • State v. Gideon
  • State v. Tormasi
  • Branch v. Cream-O-Land Dairy
  • Doe v. Rutgers

STAY INFORMED

SIGN UP HERE FOR OUR WEEKLY NEWSLETTER WITH SUMMARIES OF ALL THE PAST WEEK'S PRECEDENTIAL OPINIONS FROM THE STATE COURTS OF PENNSYLVANIA AND NEW JERSEY AS WELL AS THE OPINIONS FROM THE THIRD CIRCUIT.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

FOLLOW MATT

FOLLOW DAVID

Sullivan | Simon, LLC
Camden Law Building
330 Market Street
Camden, New Jersey 08102
p. 856-685-8960
f. 267-200-0119
[email protected]

© 2020 Sullivan | Simon, LLC. All Rights Reserved.
Website by J2 Technology SOLUTIONS LLC