Commonwealth v. Diego
Superior Court of Pennsylvania
1Opinion of the Court
OPINION BY
BENDER, P.J.E.:
The Commonwealth appeals from the trial court’s order granting Curtis Doval Diego’s (Appellee) suppression motion based on purported violations of the Wiretapping and Electronic Surveillance Control Act, 18 Pa.C.S. § 5701 et seq. (“Wiretap Act” or the “Act”). The Commonwealth contends that an iPad is not a “device” as that term is defined under the Wiretap Act, and that Appellee’s text’ messages were not “intercepted” within the meaning of the Act. The Commonwealth also argues that Appellee lacks a reasonable expectation of privacy in his text message communicátions.…
2Cases cited14 opinions
- Riley v. Cal. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2014
- United States v. MaxwellCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 1996
- In Re Nomination of PaulmierSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
- Commonwealth v. BavusaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
- Commonwealth v. ProettoSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2001
9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by13 opinions
- Ashley Popa v. Harriet Carter Gifts Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2022
- Commonwealth v. ByrdSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2018
- Commonwealth v. SmithSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2016
- Com. v. Byrd, A.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2018
- Com. v. Byrd, J.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2018
8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.