In a recent case coming out of a Massachusetts court, five codefendants appealed their drug-related convictions. According to the defendants, the wiretap warrants that law enforcement agencies used in their investigation were unconstitutional, thus the evidence discovered as a result of these warrants should have been suppressed. The court considered each of the defendant’s appeals and ultimately affirmed the convictions of all five individuals.
Facts of the Case
According to the opinion, law enforcement officials came to a Superior Court judge in 2017 asking that judge to grant a series of eleven wiretap warrants. According to the officers, they were investigating a criminal drug distribution network, which was complex and difficult to understand in its full scope. With the warrants, the officers could uncover drug stash locations, the sources of the drug supply, and the different individuals involved in the operation.
The officers also explained to the judge that they had been investigating this particular drug operation since 2001. They had used confidential informants, undercover officers, physical surveillance, and video surveillance. Even with all of these investigatory methods in place, the officers had not been able to uncover all of the information they needed. They also were apprehensive that other traditional methods, such as trash pulls or interviews, would be valuable in finishing up their investigation.
The judge authorized the wiretap warrants, and the officers immediately got to work. Soon, the officers located a vehicle containing a kilogram of cocaine and approximately $34,000 in cash. The defendants linked to the vehicle were arrested, charged, and convicted based on their drug-related crimes.
The defendants argued on appeal that the officers’ warrants were a violation of their constitutional right to privacy. According to the U.S. Constitution, individuals should be free from unwarranted searches and seizures by the government. The defendants argued that because the officers used wiretaps to listen to their private phone conversations, their privacy rights were substantially violated.
The court recognized that the defendants did have a constitutional right to privacy; however, the court also emphasized that the Commonwealth of Massachusetts had an important goal of putting an end to the drug distribution network. The officers had attempted other methods of investigation and needed to wiretap the defendants’ phones in order to learn more information. It was reasonable for the officers to request the warrant from the judge, and they made their requests in a procedurally appropriate manner.
After concluding that the officers’ conduct was reasonable and appropriate under the circumstances, the court determined that the wiretaps were valid. The defendants’ appeal was thus denied.
Have You Been Charged with Drug-Related Crimes in Massachusetts?
If you are facing drug charges in Massachusetts, know that we at the Law Office of Patrick J. Murphy are on your side. We are committed to relentlessly fighting for your rights because we understand that when your freedom is on the line, you cannot afford to take any chances. For your free and confidential consultation, give us a call today at 617-367-0450.