SAN DIEGO DISTRICT ATTORNEY The Fourth Amendment and ...

communications, the manner in which such equipment is
used is clearly distinguished and mutually exclusive:
“Wiretapping” is intercepting communications by an
unauthorized connection to the transmission line whereas
“eavesdropping” is interception of communications by the
use of equipment which is not connected to any
transmission line.
Limitations on the Use of Search Warrants:
Newsroom Searches:
P.C. § 1524(g) provides that; “No warrant shall issue for any item
described in section 1070 of the Evidence Code.”
Evid. Code § 1070 is the so-called “newsman’s privilege” section
and lists “unpublished information” such as “notes, outtakes,
photographs, tapes or other data of whatever sort not itself
disseminated to the public” as privileged.
Therefore, such items may not be the subject of a search
warrant.
This is not a federal constitutional requirement. Such
searches are legal except as prohibited by state law.
(Zurcher v. The Stanford Daily (1978) 436 U.S. 547 [56
L.Ed.2 nd 525].)
This does not protect from search warrants other evidentiary items
and contraband, as listed in P.C. § 1524(a)(1) through (8), where
there is probable cause to believe the item sought is in a
newsroom.
Searches of, and on, Indian Tribal Property:
Search Warrants:
The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal initially ruled that use of
a search warrant to seize “uniquely tribal property on tribal
land” is a violation of Indian sovereignty, in a civil suit
filed pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983, and therefore illegal.
(Bishop Paiute Tribe v. County of Inyo (9 th Cir. 2002) 275
F.3 rd 893.)
© 2012 Robert C. Phillips. All rights reserved
The Court reasoned that seizure of Indian casino
employee records in a welfare fraud case was not
366