Share on LinkedInShare on LinkedIn

ARTICLE · 06 MARCH 2013

Aggressive Wiretap Affirmed With Little Fanfare

Katten
Katten
Contributor
Katten

Katten

With client service at our core and a collective desire to foster an inclusive environment for a...

View firm profile
Explore more from Katten

This article explores the court-approved aggressive wiretap of conference lines in United States v. Fleishman and how that decision expands the reach of law enforcement’s wiretapping capabilities.

United StatesLitigation, Mediation & Arbitration

On Jan. 8, 2013, in a surprisingly quiet summary order, the Second Circuit upheld the judgment of conviction of James Fleishman, who was convicted for conspiracy to commit securities fraud and wire fraud based in part on a "trunk line" wiretap. United States v. Fleishman, Summary Order, No. 12-94-cr (2d Cir. Jan. 8, 2013).

The wiretap order was aggressive and unique. It captured 104 different PIN numbers of a third-party conference call line housed in Las Vegas. Wiretapping such a large number of users was not necessarily remarkable, but what was really surprising was that the government did not allege, and no court ever found, that there was probable cause that each separate PIN number was being used to facilitate criminal activity—only that evidence of criminality could be found on the conference call line as a whole.

We operate a free-to-view policy, asking only that you register in order to read all of our content. Please login or register to view the rest of this article.

See more popular content from