State v. Fratello

The State appeals the order entered by the trial court granting appellee James Otte’s motion to suppress intercepts obtained by the police pursuant to a wiretap of his home phone.1 Concluding that the trial court properly determined that the wiretap intercepts were unauthorized under federal or state law, we affirm.

Otte was charged with racketeering, conspiracy to commit racketeering, and deriving support from prostitution. The information alleged that Otte was employed by, or associated with, a business operating under the name of Elegant Encounters. After the charges were filed, the State…