Commonwealth v. Byrd, J., Pet ( 2018 )

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA
WESTERN DISTRICT
COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, : No. 179 WAL 2018
:
Respondent :
: Petition for Allowance of Appeal from
: the Order of the Superior Court
v. :
:
:
JAMES T. BYRD, A/K/A AL-TARIQ :
SHARIF ALI BYRD, :
:
Petitioner :
ORDER
PER CURIAM
AND NOW, this 19th day of September, 2018, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal
is GRANTED. The issue, rephrased for clarity, is:
i. Where an inmate defendant seeks to suppress recordings of his jail
visit communications in a criminal proceeding, must the
Commonwealth demonstrate that the inmate had actual knowledge
that he was being recorded to satisfy the “prior consent” requirement
of the two-party consent exception to the Wiretapping and Electronic
Surveillance Control Act (“Wiretap Act”), 18 Pa.C.S. § 5704(4)?
ii. If actual knowledge is required by the statute, did the Superior Court
err in concluding that Byrd had actual knowledge that he was being
recorded?