United States v. Vancier
District Court, S.D. New York
1Opinion of the Court
LASKER, District Judge.
The defendants move for reconsideration of the court’s holding that the tapes of conversations between a government informant and the defendants, tapes allegedly made with the informant’s consent, were not required to be sealed under 18 U.S.C. § 2518(8)(a), which requires the sealing of tapes of “any wire or oral communication intercepted by any means authorized by this chapter [18 U.S.C. §§ 2510-2520].” They argue that “any means authorized by this chapter” includes all lawful means of intercepting oral or wire communications, because “except as otherwise provided in…
2Cases cited1 opinion
- United States v. CianfraniCourt of Appeals for the Third Circuit · 1978
3Cited by4 opinions
- Commonwealth v. SpanglerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2002
- State v. SchultzNew Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · 1980
- Commonwealth v. Shuman, Pennsylvania Court of Common Pleas, Berks County2007
- Commonwealth v. SpanglerSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 2002