State v. Jackson

Brief of Amici Curiae The American Civil Liberties Union, The National Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers, and The Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers of New Jersey

Brief filed: 02/11/2019


State v. Jackson

Superior Court of New Jersey; Case No. A-22-18; AM-715-17

Prior Decision

On appeal from an interlocutory order of the Superior Court of New Jersey, Law Division, Middlesex County, suppressing evidence and dismissing a count of the indictment, Indictment No. 18-04-555-I


The state violates the Fourth Amendment and article 1, paragraph 7 when it obtains access to an incarcerated person’s recorded telephone conversations without a warrant. Jackson had a reasonable expectation of privacy in the calls he made to his mother from jail. Jackson did not forfeit all privacy rights in his telephone conversations by exposing them to jail staff for security monitoring purposes. Jackson did not consent to the State accessing his calls for its use in his prosecution. Requiring prosecutors to secure warrants in order to access jail calls is the only adequate way to protect the constitutional and policy interests the calls implicate.


Liza Weisberg, Alexander Shalom, and Jeanne LoCicero, American Civil Liberties Union of New Jersey Foundation, Newark, NJ; Sharon Bittner Kean, Association of Criminal Defense Lawyers of New Jersey, Madison, NJ; Daniella Gordon, Hyland Levin Shapiro LLP, Marlton, NJ.

Explore keywords to find information

Featured Products