Bills · 2009-2010 Regular Session
subpoenas and warrants requiring providers of electronic communications services or of remote computing services to provide customer information or disclose contents of wire or electronic communications.
- Introduced, stopped here
- Passes Assembly, not reached
- Passes Senate, not reached
- Governor signs, not reached
- Law, not reached
Unfamiliar terms? Glossary
What this bill does
Plain-language analysis by the nonpartisan Legislative Reference Bureau
Under current law a judge may, upon a showing of probable cause, issue a
search warrant authorizing the police to search a designated person, object, or place
for the purpose of seizing specific property. A judge may issue a search warrant
authorizing a search anywhere the state. In addition, a judge may, upon a showing
of probable cause, issue a subpoena requiring a person to produce specified
documents.
This bill authorizes a judge to issue a subpoena or warrant requiring a provider
of electronic communication service or of remote computing service to produce
certain records relating to a customer or the customer's wire or electronic
communications. Under the bill, "remote computing service" means computer
storage or processing provided to the public by means of an electronic
communications system. Upon a showing of probable cause, a court may issue a
subpoena requiring a provider of electronic communication service or of remote
computing service to provide information related to a customer, including the
customer's name, address, telephone number, network address, and bank or credit
card account number used to pay the provider, as well as records of the services the
customer utilized and records of session times and durations. The bill also
authorizes a judge, upon a showing of probable cause, to issue a warrant requiring
a provider of electronic communication service or of remote computing service to
disclose the contents of a customer's wire or electronic communications as well as the
customer information described above.
A judge may issue a subpoena or warrant authorized by the bill to any provider
that enters into an agreement with a person, whether or not the person is a resident
of this state, if any part of the performance of the agreement takes place within this
state. Under the bill, a law enforcement officer need not be present for the service
or execution of the subpoena or warrant. The bill requires that a subpoena or
warrant be issued secretly and provides that a judge may seal the subpoena or
warrant and the request, complaint, affidavit, or testimony upon which the subpoena
or warrant is based. The bill grants a provider of electronic communication service
or of remote computing service immunity from civil liability for acts or omissions
committed in accordance with a subpoena or warrant.
The bill also allows a provider of electronic communication service or of remote
computing service to disclose information relating to a customer or the contents of
a customer's wire or electronic communications if the customer consents, or if the
provider has a good faith belief that disclosure is required to prevent death or serious
physical injury to a person or to mitigate serious physical injury to a person.
Finally, the bill modifies the definition of "wire communication" that is
applicable to the requirement to obtain a warrant before intercepting a wire
communication. Under current law, "wire communication" is defined, in part, as any
aural transfer made through the use of facilities for the transmission of
Sponsors
Votes
Assembly: Report Assembly Amendment 1 adoption recommended by committee on Judiciary and Ethics, Ayes 7, Noes 0
Passed 7–0 Apr 9, 2010 official source full pageNo individual roll call was recorded for this vote. Committee votes and some older sessions record totals only.
Full history
- Feb 12, 2010 · Assembly
Introduced by Representatives Pasch, Berceau, Townsend, Danou, Bies, Fields, Turner, Richards, Sinicki, Jorgensen and Kaufert;Cosponsored by Senators Sullivan, Taylor and Darling
- Feb 12, 2010 · Assembly
Read first time and referred to committee on Judiciary and Ethics
- Feb 18, 2010 · Assembly
LRB correction
- Feb 23, 2010 · Assembly
Public hearing held
- Mar 25, 2010 · Assembly
Assembly amendment 1 offered by Representative Pasch
- Apr 6, 2010 · Assembly
Executive action taken
- Apr 9, 2010 · Assembly
Report Assembly Amendment 1 adoption recommended by committee on Judiciary and Ethics, Ayes 7, Noes 0
- Apr 9, 2010 · Assembly
Report passage as amended recommended by committee on Judiciary and Ethics, Ayes 7, Noes 0
- Apr 9, 2010 · Assembly
Referred to committee on Rules
- Apr 13, 2010 · Assembly
Made a special order of business at 11:37 A.M. on 4-15-2010 pursuant to Assembly Resolution 22
- Apr 15, 2010 · Assembly
Laid on the table
- Apr 28, 2010 · Assembly
Failed to pass pursuant to Senate Joint Resolution 1