United States v. Faulkner

The Cyber Blog IndiaCase Summary

Admissibility of call recordings from prison telephone service

United States v. Faulkner
439 F.3d 1221
In the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit
Case Number 05-3061
Before the Chief Judge Tacha, Circuit Judges Anderson and Circuit Judge Hartz
Decided on March 06, 2006

Relevancy of the case: Admissibility of call recordings from prison telephone service

Statutes and Provisions Involved

  • The Federal Wiretapping Act, 18 USC §§ 2510-2522

Relevant Facts of the Case

  • The District Court for the District of Kansas charged Faulkner, Rodgers, and Peters with two counts of murder.
  • The charges stemmed from a conspiracy to kill Kimbrel, allegedly to prevent his testimony in Hargrove’s kidnapping trial.
  • The appellants moved to suppress recordings of five phone conversations between Hargrove and others during pretrial detention at the Corrections Corporation of America (CCA) facility.
  • The CCA Orientation Manual clearly states that calls are recorded and monitored. A recorded message also warns detainees that their calls are subject to monitoring and recording.

Prominent Arguments by the Counsels

  • The appellant’s counsel argued that the admission of the recorded conversations violated the Confrontation Clause of the United States Constitution. Additionally, counsel claimed that the failure to allow them to cross-examine Hargrove, who did not testify, violated their right to confront the witnesses against them.

Opinion of the Bench

  • Individuals involved were incarcerated persons who received explicit warnings about the specific phones authorities monitored.
  • Prisoners at the CCA did not have the option to choose an unmonitored telephone, recognising that losing certain choices is an inherent outcome of confinement.
  • Moreover, prison inmates generally have limited expectations of privacy in their communications.

Final Decision

  • The court allowed the recordings and affirmed the decision of the District Court.

Sreekutty R, an undergraduate student at National Law University Odisha, prepared this case summary during her internship with The Cyber Blog India in May/June 2023.