SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

FOR THE COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES

The court has reviewed its order of November 18, 1998, and finds it to be unambiguous. However, insofar as the parties appear to differ as to its meaning, I will reiterate it and attempt to address issues that were not addressed prior to November 18th, in order to narrow any areas of controversy between the parties.

An inventory within the meaning of Penal Code section 629.68 is to be served only on those persons named in the order and other known parties to intercepted communications.

The notice referred to in the November 18th order is directed to those cases where a defendant case was initiated in some way from information or evidence gathered as a result of a wiretap. This would include cases where evidence was gathered as a result of a wiretap even though a defendant was not named in a wiretap order or did not have their communications intercepted. The order would also include so-called "hand-off" cases.

Not included would be cases where no evidence or leads were developed as a result of a wiretap. For example, if a police agency is already investigating a defendant independently of any evidence from a wiretap but the defendant's name is mentioned during a wiretap, notice would not have to be given unless required by Penal Code section 629.68 or 629.70.

The District Attorney does have an affirmative obligation to investigate all wiretaps to determine if there are parties who should be given notice.

The notice required in these cases, as opposed to that required by Penal Code sections 629.68 and 629.70, is the notice now being used by the District Attorney.

The purpose of the Court's order of November 18th is to allow any defendant who may have standing pursuant to Penal Code section 629.72 to litigate that issue in the trial court, without allowing the People to make a determination of standing of a defendant on their own. It was not and is not the Court's intention to expand or restrict the current wiretapping laws, nor would I have the authority to do so.

November 10, 1999

LARRY PAUL FIDLER
Judge of the Superior Court

Order has been retyped and published in .html format by LA Public Defender's Office 10/11/99