澳门百家乐 (中国)有限公司官网

沈阳金沙集团沈北项目招聘 (中国)·官方网站

Skip to main content

This is archived content from the U.S. Department of Justice website. The information here may be outdated and links may no longer function. Please contact webmaster@usdoj.gov if you have any questions about the archive site.

CRM 1-499

32. Video Surveillance—Use of Closed-Circuit Television (CCTV)

Video surveillance, which is the use of closed-circuit television (CCTV) to conduct a visual surveillance of a person or a place, is not covered by Title III. Rather, its use is governed by the Fourth Amendment and, therefore, when a reasonable expectation of privacy exists, a search warrant should be sought pursuant to Fed. R. Crim. P. 41 and the All Writs Act, codified at 28 U.S.C. 1651. Six circuits, while recognizing that Title III does not govern video surveillance, require that search warrants for video surveillance meet certain higher, constitutional standards required under Title III. See United States v. Falls, 34 F.3d 674 (8th Cir. 1994); United States v. Koyomejian, 970 F.2d 536 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 113 S. Ct. 617 (1992); United States v. Mesa-Rincon, 911 F.2d 1433 (10th Cir. 1990); United States v. Cuevas-Sanchez, 821 F.2d 248 (5th Cir. 1987); United States v. Biasucci, 786 F.2d 504 (2d Cir. 1986), cert. denie d, 479 U.S. 827 (1986); and United States v. Torres, 751 F.2d 875 (7th Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 470 U.S. 1087 (1985).

Accordingly, a search warrant requesting to use video surveillance must demonstrate not only probable cause to believe that evidence of a Federal crime will be obtained by the surveillance, but also should include: (1) a factual statement that alternative investigative methods have been tried and failed or reasonably appear to be unlikely to succeed if tried or would be too dangerous; (2) a statement of the steps to be taken to assure that the surveillance will be minimized to effectuate only the purposes for which the order is issued; (3) a particularized description of the premises to be surveilled; (4) a statement of the duration of the order, which shall not be longer than is necessary to achieve the objective of the authorization nor, in any event, longer than 30 days, measured from the date of the order (without any 10-day grace period to begin interception, but with 30-day extension periods possible); and (5) the names of the persons to be surveilled, if known.

The Department requires that the investigative agency seeking to use court-ordered video surveillance obtain prior approval from the appropriate Department official. That policy appears at JM 9-7.200.

[cited in JM 9-7.200]

正规赌场 澳门威尼斯人 全讯网现金网 葡京赌场 百家乐网
四会市 堆龙德庆县 泽库县 玉屏 普兰县 招远市
曲松县 米易县 吉木萨尔县 古田县 上犹县 易门县
津南区 咸阳市 安义县 台北市 灌阳县 浪卡子县
鸿博鸿运楼娱乐| 七匹狼娱乐城开户| 凤城市| 网上赌博网平台开户| 大发下载| 博彩游戏机| 24山 分金 水口 论 吉凶| e世博怎么样| 君王娱乐城| 磨丁赌场开户| 澳门百家乐玩法心得技巧| 虹乐棋牌是真的吗| 网上斗地主赢现金| 百家乐最好的投注方法| 36棋牌的深海捕鱼| 智尊备用网站址| 真钱名门博彩| 信誉国际娱乐城| 百家乐赌博筹码大不大| 莆田棋牌游戏| 博彩网站大全送白菜| 大赢家官网开户| 炸金花游戏| 大发888奖金| 喜盈门娱乐城| 百家乐大西洋城v| 皇冠注投网最新备用网址| 澳门真人娱乐城| 百家乐娱乐网网| 龙博线上娱乐| 合胜线上娱乐| 永利赌场| bbin现金网| 风水8闰24山| 尊龙娱乐城信誉| 缅甸百家乐网络赌博解谜| 皇冠单式欧洲杯| 缅甸百家乐博彩真假| 博彩现金网大全| 迁安市| 大发888问题缺少组件|