The U.S. Constitution protects a right to be free of unlawful search and seizure. Because your rights are protected, the state cannot just do whatever they want when investigating you for allegedly breaking the law. One area where the restraints on state power are especially strong relates to when investigators can intercept your private communications.
Wire or oral communications should be kept private and there are limited circumstances in which your communications can be listened to without your knowledge or consent. It is important to understand when the laws in the state of Nevada allow for your communications to be intercepted. If your communication is intercepted as part of an investigation into criminal acts, it is also vital that you understand exactly what your rights are. Any evidence obtained unlawfully if proper protocols were not followed for the interception of communications cannot be used against you in court.
LV Criminal Defense can help you to understand the laws on the interception of communications and can assist you in arguing for evidence to be suppressed if it was collected in violation of your rights.
To find out more about now our Las Vegas defense lawyers can help you to respond when you’re under investigation and/or when your communications have been intercepted, give us a call today.
Nevada Revised Statute section 179.460 explains the types of cases in which interception of communications can be authorized. According to the relevant statute, the attorney general or a district attorney within any county in the state of Nevada can appeal to a district court judge or to the Nevada Supreme Court. The district court judge or Supreme Court judge can grant an order authorizing wire or oral communications to be intercepted in situations where intercepting communications could potentially result in evidence of certain serious crimes.
N.R.S. 179.460 lists the types of crimes which can prompt a Nevada judge to permit the interception of oral or wire communications that may prove wrongdoing. Under the law, the interception of oral or wire communications is permitted in situations where such interception could lead to evidence of the commission of a murder, kidnapping, bribery, extortion, robbery, using explosives to destroy public property, sexual offenses committed against a child; and any offense being committed that was made a felony under N.R.S. Chapter 453 or chapter 454.
Nick Wooldridge has a long track record of representing clients accused of serious federal and state crimes in Nevada.
A sexual offense against a child, for purposes of this code section, is defined to include incest, lewdness, sadomasochistic abuse, sexual assault, statutory sexual seduction, or luring a child or luring a person with a mental disorder, provided the charge is a felony charge.
In order for a court to issue an order allowing for communications to be intercepted, it must be demonstrated to the court that the interception may provide evidence that a listed offense was actually committed.
A Las Vegas defense attorney at LV Criminal Defense can help anyone who discovers their communications are being intercepted or anyone who is being prosecuted for a criminal offense when the prosecutor is using information obtained from intercepted communications. Our experienced legal team will work hard to determine if the investigators followed all proper protocols for obtaining permission for intercepting communications and to determine if all the requirements were followed regarding how communications were intercepted.
If there were any problems in the process by which communications were intercepted, the evidence that was obtained should not be able to be used by the prosecutor to help secure a conviction for an offense.
To find out more about how our legal team can assist you in getting evidence suppressed and in working to make it difficult for a prosecutor to meet the burden of proving guilt in criminal proceeding, give us a call today.
When I initially met with Mr. Wooldridge, he took the opportunity to sit and go over my problem with me. He described details in my case which he found disturbing and explained why he I should have him on my side.