State v. Burns

#CDW #4thAmendment #Wiretap

During an 18-month investigation into narcotics trafficking, prosecutors sought and received Communication Data Warrants pursuant to New Jersey’s Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Control Act. While utilizing those warrants civilian contractors were appointed to work as monitors to review the intercepted data. The defendants sought to suppress the data, as New Jersey’s Wiretapping Act did not expressly permit this, unlike the federal counterpart, Title III of the Omnibus Crime and Sage Streets Act. The Appellate Division nonetheless permitted the practice, as the relevant statute did not expressly prohibit the tactic.