1 Jurisdictions include Federal Government, States, and the District of Columbia.
2 Average per authorized installation.
3 Based on information received from intercepts installed in year shown; additional arrests/convictions will occur in subsequent years but arenot shown here.

Source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts,Report on Applications for Orders Authorizing or Approving the Interception ofWire, Oral or Electronic Communications, (Wiretap Report), annual.

http://www.uscourts.gov/

*Applications for Orders Authorizingor Approving the Interception of Wire, Oral,or Electronic Communications

Reporting Requirements ofthe Statute

Each federal and state judge is required tofile a written report with the Director of theAdministrative Office of the United States Courts(AO) on each application for an order authorizingthe interception of a wire, oral, or electroniccommunication (18 U.S.C. 2519(1)). This reportis to be furnished within 30 days of the denial ofthe application or the expiration of the court order(after all extensions have expired). The reportmust include the name of the official who appliedfor the order, the offense under investigation, thetype of interception device, the general location ofthe device, and the duration of the authorizedintercept.

Prosecuting officials who applied for interceptionorders are required to submit reports tothe AO no later than January 31 on all orders thatwere terminated during the previous calendaryear. These reports contain information related tothe cost of the intercept, the number of days theintercept device was actually in operation, thetotal number of intercepts, and the number ofincriminating intercepts recorded. Results such asarrests, trials, convictions, and the number ofmotions to suppress evidence related directly tothe use of intercepts are also noted.

Neither the judges reports nor the prosecutingofficials reports contain the names, addresses,or phone numbers of the parties investigated. TheAO is not authorized to collect this information.

These data are tabulations of the number of applicationsfor interceptions that were granted or denied,as reported by judges, as well as the numberof authorizations for which interception deviceswere installed, as reported by prosecuting officials.No statistics are available on the number ofdevices installed for each authorization.

No report to the AO is required when anorder is issued with the consent of one of theprincipal parties to the communication. Examplesof such situations include the use of a wire interceptionto investigate obscene phone calls; theinterception of a communication to which a policeofficer or police informant is a party; the use of abody microphone; or the use of only a pen register(a mechanical device attached to a telephone lineto record on paper tape all numbers dialed fromthat line).

Regulations

The Director of the AO is empowered todevelop and revise the reporting regulations andreporting forms for collecting information on intercepts.Copies of the regulations, the reportingforms, and the federal wiretapping statute may beobtained by writing to the Administrative Office ofthe United States Courts, Statistics Division, Washington,D.C. 20544.

The Attorney General of the United States,the Deputy Attorney General, the Associate AttorneyGeneral, any Assistant Attorney General, anyacting Assistant Attorney General, or any speciallydesignated Deputy Assistant Attorney General inthe Criminal Division of the Department of Justicemay authorize an application to a federal judge foran order authorizing the interception of wire, oral,or electronic communications. On the state level,applications are made by a prosecuting attorneyif such attorney is authorized by a statute of thatState to make application to a State court judge ofcompetent jurisdiction.

Many wiretap orders are related to large-scalecriminal investigations that cross county andstate boundaries. Consequently, arrests, trials,and convictions resulting from these interceptionsoften do not occur within the same year as theinstallation of the intercept device. Under 18U.S.C. 2519(2), prosecuting officials must filesupplementary reports on additional court or policeactivity that occurs as a result of interceptsreported in prior years.

*