Want access to unlimited case records and advanced research tools? Create your free CasePortal account now. No credit card required to register.
Try CasePortal for FreeJ. Petersen finds that the trial court properly refused to suppress recordings of jailhouse phone calls that defendant made to his wife. He gave implied consent under the Interception Act's consent exception. An inmate handbook, a placard next to the phone and a pre-call message notified him that his calls might be monitored or recorded. Though he did not have an alternative to the jail's phone, the surveillance policy is a reasonable security measure. Affirmed.
To read this case, start your 14-day free trial.
Request a free trial account to get access to more case data, documents, and features.
To provide the best experiences, we and our partners use technologies like cookies to store and/or access device information. Consenting to these technologies will allow us and our partners to process personal data such as browsing behavior or unique IDs on this site and show (non-) personalized ads. Not consenting or withdrawing consent, may adversely affect certain features and functions.
Click below to consent to the above or make granular choices. Your choices will be applied to this site only. You can change your settings at any time, including withdrawing your consent, by using the toggles on the Cookie Policy, or by clicking on the manage consent button at the bottom of the screen.