Legal Opinion

Commonwealth v. Diego

Superior Court of Pennsylvania

Decided June 23, 2015No. 1989 MDA 2014PublishedCited by 13 opinions

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

  1. Riley v. Cal. United StatesSupreme Court of the United States · 2014
  2. United States v. MaxwellCourt of Appeals for the Armed Forces · 1996
  3. In Re Nomination of PaulmierSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2007
  4. Commonwealth v. BavusaSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2003
  5. Commonwealth v. ProettoSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2001

9 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by13 opinions

  1. Ashley Popa v. Harriet Carter Gifts Inc.Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 2022
  2. Commonwealth v. ByrdSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2018
  3. Commonwealth v. SmithSuperior Court of Pennsylvania · 2016
  4. Com. v. Byrd, A.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2018
  5. Com. v. Byrd, J.Superior Court of Pennsylvania · 2018

8 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API