SB 210 — Searches of Cellular Phones and Other Electronic Devices

requiring the search warrant to command the officer to complete any installationinitiation of the location tracking authorized by the search warrant within a certain timeframe;

providing requirements for the return of the search warrant to the judge and service of a copy of the search warrant on the person who was tracked or whose property was tracked;

specifying how a search warrant authorizing the acquisition of historical location data must be returned and served;

authorizing any investigative or law enforcement officer who is specially designated by certain persons and who makes specified determinations to engage in real-time location tracking if a search warrant is later obtained as specified;

reenacting s.

934.22(2)(b), F.S., relating to voluntary disclosure of customer communications or records, to incorporate the amendments made to ss.

934.03 and 934.07, F.S., in references thereto;

reenacting s.

934.27(1) and (4), F.S., relating to relief, damages, and defenses for certain civil actions, to incorporate the amendments made to ss.

934.09 and 934.21, F.S., in references thereto;

reenacting ss.

934.23(6), 934.24(6) and (7), 934.25(5), and 934.28, F.S., relating to required disclosures of customer communications or records, a subscriber or customer filing a motion for certain relief and customer notification, delayed notice, and the exclusivity of remedies and sanctions for certain violations, respectively, to incorporate the amendment made to s.

934.21, F.S., in references thereto;

58127 Be It Enacted by the Legislature of the State of Florida:

60129 Section 1. Section1. Subsection 934.01,(3) of section 933.02, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:

933.02 Grounds for issuance of search warrant.—Upon proper affidavits being made, a search warrant may be issued under the provisions of this chapter upon any of the following grounds:

(3) When any property, or when content held within a cellular phone, portable electronic communication device, or microphone-enabled household device as defined in s.

934.02, F.S., constitutes evidence relevant to proving that a felony has been committed;

140 This section also applies to any papers or documents used as a means of or in aid of the commission of any offense against the laws of the state.

Section 2. Section 933.04, Florida Statutes, is amended to read 933.04 Affidavits.—The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects against unreasonable seizures and searches and against the unreasonable interception of private communications by any means shall not be violated and no search warrant shall be issued except upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation particularly describing the place to be searched and the person and thing to be seized.

Section 3. Section 934.01, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:

As such, the law enforcement collection of the precise location of a person, cellular phone, or portable electronic communication device without the consent of the person or owner of the cellular phone or portable electronic communication device should be allowed only when authorized by a search warrant issued by a court of competent jurisdiction and should remain under the control and supervision of the authorizing court.

Section 2. Subsection4. Subsection (2) of section 934.02, Florida Statutes, is amended, and subsections (27) and (28) are added to that section, to read:

Section 3. Section5. Subsection 934.21,(2) of section 934.03, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:read 934.03 Interception and disclosure of wire, oral, or electronic communications prohibited.— (2)(a)1. It is lawful under this section and ss.

934.04 934.09 for an operator of a switchboard, or an officer, employee, or agent of a provider of wire or electronic communication service whose facilities are used in the transmission of a wire or electronic communication, to intercept, disclose, or use that communication in the normal course of his or her employment while engaged in any activity which is a necessary incident to the rendition of his or her service or to the protection of the rights or property of the provider of that service, except that a provider of wire communication service to the public shall not utilize service observing or random monitoring except for mechanical or service quality control checks.

2. Notwithstanding any other law, a provider of wire, oral, or electronic communication service, or an officer, employee, or agent thereof, or landlord, custodian, or other person, may provide information, facilities, or technical assistance to a person authorized by law to intercept wire, oral, or electronic communications if such provider, or an officer, employee, or agent thereof, or landlord, custodian, or other person, has been provided with:

a. A court order directing such assistance signed by the authorizing judge;

or a.b. A certification in writing by a person specified in s.

934.09(7) that no search warrant or court order is required by law, that all statutory requirements have been met, and that the specified assistance is required, setting forth the period of time during which the provision of the information, facilities, or technical assistance is authorized and specifying the information, facilities, or technical assistance required;

or b. A search warrant issued by a judge of competent jurisdiction as required by law.

3. A provider of wire, oral, or electronic communication service, or an officer, employee, or agent thereof, or landlord, custodian, or other person may not disclose the existence of any interception or the device used to accomplish the interception with respect to which the person has been served with a search warrant furnished an order under this section and ss.

934.04 934.09, except as may otherwise be required by legal process and then only after prior notice to the Governor, the Attorney General, the statewide prosecutor, or a state attorney, as may be appropriate.

Any such disclosure renders such person liable for the civil damages provided under s.

934.10, and such person may be prosecuted under s.

934.43.

An action may not be brought against any provider of wire, oral, or electronic communication service, or an officer, employee, or agent thereof, or landlord, custodian, or other person for providing information, facilities, or assistance in accordance with the terms of a search warrant court order under this section and ss.

934.04 934.09.

(b) It is lawful under this section and ss.

934.04-934.09 for an officer, employee, or agent of the Federal Communications Commission, in the normal course of his or her employment and in discharge of the monitoring responsibilities exercised by the commission in the enforcement of 47 U.S.C.

chapter 5, to intercept a wire, oral, or electronic communication transmitted by radio or to disclose or use the information thereby obtained.

(c) It is lawful under this section and ss.

934.04-934.09 for an investigative or law enforcement officer or a person acting under the direction of an investigative or law enforcement officer to intercept a wire, oral, or electronic communication when such person is a party to the communication or one of the parties to the communication has given prior consent to such interception and the purpose of such interception is to obtain evidence of a criminal act.

(d) It is lawful under this section and ss.

934.04-934.09 for a person to intercept a wire, oral, or electronic communication when all of the parties to the communication have given prior consent to such interception.

(e) It is unlawful to intercept any wire, oral, or electronic communication for the purpose of committing any criminal act.

(f) It is lawful under this section and ss.

934.04-934.09 for an employee of a telephone company to intercept a wire communication for the sole purpose of tracing the origin of such communication when the interception is requested by the recipient of the communication and the recipient alleges that the communication is obscene, harassing, or threatening in nature.

The individual conducting the interception shall notify local police authorities within 48 hours after the time of the interception.

(g) It is lawful under this section and ss.

934.04-934.09 for an employee of:

1. An ambulance service licensed pursuant to s.

401.25, a fire station employing firefighters as defined by s.

633.102, a public utility, a law enforcement agency as defined by s.

934.02(10), or any other entity with published emergency telephone numbers;

2. An agency operating an emergency telephone number “911” system established pursuant to s.

365.171;

or 3. The central abuse hotline operated pursuant to s.

39.201 345 to intercept and record incoming wire communications;

however, such employee may intercept and record incoming wire communications on designated “911” telephone numbers and published nonemergency telephone numbers staffed by trained dispatchers at public safety answering points only.

It is also lawful for such employee to intercept and record outgoing wire communications to the numbers from which such incoming wire communications were placed when necessary to obtain information required to provide the emergency services being requested.

For the purpose of this paragraph, the term “public utility” has the same meaning as provided in s.

366.02 and includes a person, partnership, association, or corporation now or hereafter owning or operating equipment or facilities in the state for conveying or transmitting messages or communications by telephone or telegraph to the public for compensation.

(h) It shall not be unlawful under this section and ss.

934.04-934.09 for any person:

1. To intercept or access an electronic communication made through an electronic communication system that is configured so that such electronic communication is readily accessible to the general public.

2. To intercept any radio communication which is transmitted:

a. By any station for the use of the general public, or that relates to ships, aircraft, vehicles, or persons in distress;

b. By any governmental, law enforcement, civil defense, private land mobile, or public safety communications system, including any police or fire communications system, readily accessible to the general public;

c. By a station operating on an authorized frequency within the bands allocated to the amateur, citizens band, or general mobile radio services;

or d. By any marine or aeronautical communications system.

3. To engage in any conduct which:

a. Is prohibited by s.

633 of the Communications Act of 1934;

or b. Is excepted from the application of s.

705(a) of the Communications Act of 1934 by s.

705(b) of that act.

4. To intercept any wire or electronic communication the transmission of which is causing harmful interference to any lawfully operating station of consumer electronic equipment to the extent necessary to identify the source of such interference.

5. To intercept, if such person is another user of the same frequency, any radio communication that is not scrambled or encrypted made through a system that utilizes frequencies monitored by individuals engaged in the provision or the use of such system.

6. To intercept a satellite transmission that is not scrambled or encrypted and that is transmitted:

a. To a broadcasting station for purposes of retransmission to the general public;

or b. As an audio subcarrier intended for redistribution to facilities open to the public, but not including data transmissions or telephone calls, when such interception is not for the purposes of direct or indirect commercial advantage or private financial gain.

7. To intercept and privately view a private satellite video communication that is not scrambled or encrypted or to intercept a radio communication that is transmitted on frequencies allocated under subpart D of part 74 of the rules of the Federal Communications Commission that is not scrambled or encrypted, if such interception is not for a tortious or illegal purpose or for purposes of direct or indirect commercial advantage or private commercial gain.

(i) It shall not be unlawful under this section and ss.

934.04-934.09:

1. To use a pen register or a trap and trace device as authorized under ss.

934.31-934.34 or under federal law;

or 2. For a provider of electronic communication service to record the fact that a wire or electronic communication was initiated or completed in order to protect such provider, another provider furnishing service toward the completion of the wire or electronic communication, or a user of that service, from fraudulent, unlawful, or abusive use of such service.

(j) It is not unlawful under this section and ss.

934.04 934.09 for a person acting under color of law to intercept the wire or electronic communications of a computer trespasser which are transmitted to, through, or from a protected computer if:

1. The owner or operator of the protected computer authorizes the interception of the communications of the computer trespasser;

2. The person acting under color of law is lawfully engaged in an investigation;

3. The person acting under color of law has reasonable grounds to believe that the contents of the communications of the computer trespasser will be relevant to the investigation;

and 4. The interception does not acquire communications other than those transmitted to, through, or from the computer trespasser.

(k) It is lawful under this section and ss.

934.04-934.09 for a child under 18 years of age to intercept and record an oral communication if the child is a party to the communication and has reasonable grounds to believe that recording the communication will capture a statement by another party to the communication that the other party intends to commit, is committing, or has committed an unlawful sexual act or an unlawful act of physical force or violence against the child.

Section 6.  Section 934.06, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:

934.06 Prohibition of use as evidence of intercepted wire or oral communications;

content of cellular phone, microphone enabled household device, or portable electronic communication device;

exceptions.—Whenever any wire or oral communication has been intercepted, or when the content of a cellular phone, microphone-enabled household device, or portable electronic communication device is obtained without a search warrant supported by probable cause no part of the contents of such communication and no evidence derived therefrom may be received in evidence in any trial, hearing, or other proceeding in or before any court, grand jury, department, officer, agency, regulatory body, legislative committee, or other authority of the state, or a political subdivision thereof, if the disclosure of that information would be in violation of this chapter.

The prohibition of use as evidence provided in this section does not apply in cases of prosecution for criminal interception in violation of the provisions of this chapter, or in cases where the content of a cellular phone, microphone-enabled household device, or portable electronic communication device is lawfully obtained under circumstances where a search warrant is not required.

Section 7. Subsections (1) and (2) of section 934.07, Florida Statutes, are amended to read:

934.07 Authorization for interception of wire, oral, or electronic communications.— (1) The Governor, the Attorney General, the statewide prosecutor, or any state attorney may authorize an application to a judge of competent jurisdiction for, and such judge may issue grant in conformity with ss.

934.03-934.09 a search warrant as required by law an order authorizing or approving the interception of, wire, oral, or electronic communications by:

(a) The Department of Law Enforcement or any law enforcement agency as defined in s.

934.02 having responsibility for the investigation of the offense as to which the application is made when such interception may provide or has provided evidence of the commission of the offense of murder, kidnapping, aircraft piracy, arson, gambling, robbery, burglary, theft, dealing in stolen property, criminal usury, bribery, or extortion;

any felony violation of ss.

790.161-790.166, inclusive;

any violation of s.

787.06;

any violation of chapter 893;

any violation of the provisions of the Florida Anti-Fencing Act;

any violation of chapter 895;

any violation of chapter 896;

any violation of chapter 815;

any violation of chapter 847;

any violation of s.

827.071;

any violation of s.

944.40;

or any conspiracy or solicitation to commit any violation of the laws of this state relating to the crimes specifically enumerated in this paragraph.

(b) The Department of Law Enforcement, together with other assisting personnel as authorized and requested by the department under s.

934.09(5), for the investigation of the offense as to which the application is made when such interception may provide or has provided evidence of the commission of any offense that may be an act of terrorism or in furtherance of an act of terrorism or evidence of any conspiracy or solicitation to commit any such violation.

(2)(a) If, during the course of an interception of communications by a law enforcement agency as authorized under paragraph (1)(a), the law enforcement agency finds that the intercepted communications may provide or have provided evidence of the commission of any offense that may be an act of terrorism or in furtherance of an act of terrorism, or evidence of any conspiracy or solicitation to commit any such violation, the law enforcement agency shall promptly notify the Department of Law Enforcement and apprise the department of the contents of the intercepted communications.

The agency notifying the department may continue its previously authorized interception with appropriate minimization, as applicable, and may otherwise assist the department as provided in this section.

(b) Upon its receipt of information of the contents of an intercepted communications from a law enforcement agency, the Department of Law Enforcement shall promptly review the information to determine whether the information relates to an actual or anticipated act of terrorism as defined in this section.

If, after reviewing the contents of the intercepted communications, there is probable cause that the contents of the intercepted communications meet the criteria of paragraph (1)(b), the Department of Law Enforcement may make application for the interception of wire, oral, or electronic communications consistent with paragraph (1)(b).

The department may make an independent new application for interception based on the contents of the intercepted communications.

Alternatively, the department may request the law enforcement agency that provided the information to join with the department in seeking a new search warrant as required by law or an amendment of the original interception search warrant order, or may seek additional authority to continue intercepting communications under the direction of the department.

In carrying out its duties under this section, the department may use the provisions for an emergency interception provided in s.

934.09(7) if applicable under statutory criteria.

Section 8. Section 934.09, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:

934.09 Procedure for interception of wire, oral, or electronic communications.— (1) Each application for a search warrant an order authorizing or approving the interception of a wire, oral, or electronic communication under ss.

934.03-934.09 shall be made in writing upon oath or affirmation to a judge of competent jurisdiction and shall state the applicant’s authority to make such application.

Each application shall include the following information:

(a) The identity of the investigative or law enforcement officer making the application and the officer authorizing the application.

(b) A full and complete statement of the facts and circumstances relied upon by the applicant to justify his or her belief that a search warrant an order should be issued, including:

1. Details as to the particular offense that has been, is being, or is about to be committed.

2. Except as provided in subsection (11), a particular description of the nature and location of the facilities from which, or the place where, the communications are to be intercepted.

3. A particular description of the type of communications sought to be intercepted.

4. The identity of the person, if known, committing the offense and whose communications are to be intercepted.

(c) A full and complete statement as to whether or not other investigative procedures have been tried and failed or why they reasonably appear to be unlikely to succeed if tried or to be too dangerous.

(d) A statement of the period of time for which the interception is required to be maintained and, if the nature of the investigation is such that the authorization for interception should not automatically terminate when the described type of communication has been first obtained, a particular description of facts establishing probable cause to believe that additional communications of the same type will occur thereafter.

(e) A full and complete statement of the facts concerning all previous applications known to the individual authorizing and making the application, made to any judge for authorization to intercept, or for approval of interceptions of, wire, oral, or electronic communications involving any of the same persons, facilities, or places specified in the application, and the action taken by the judge on each such application.

(f) When the application is for the extension of a search warrant an order, a statement setting forth the results thus far obtained from the interception or a reasonable explanation of the failure to obtain such results.

(2) The judge may require the applicant to furnish additional testimony or documentary evidence in support of the application.

(3) Upon such application, the judge may authorize a search warrant enter an ex parte order, as requested or as modified, authorizing or approving interception of wire, oral, or electronic communications within the territorial jurisdiction of the court in which the judge is sitting, and outside such jurisdiction but within the State of Florida in the case of a mobile interception device authorized by the judge within such jurisdiction, if the judge determines on the basis of the facts submitted by the applicant that:

(a) There is probable cause for belief that an individual is committing, has committed, or is about to commit an offense as provided in s.

934.07.

(b) There is probable cause for belief that particular communications concerning that offense will be obtained through such interception.

(c) Normal investigative procedures have been tried and have failed or reasonably appear to be unlikely to succeed if tried or to be too dangerous.

(d) Except as provided in subsection (11), there is probable cause for belief that the facilities from which, or the place where, the wire, oral, or electronic communications are to be intercepted are being used, or are about to be used, in connection with the commission of such offense, or are leased to, listed in the name of, or commonly used by such person.

(4) Each search warrant order authorizing or approving the interception of any wire, oral, or electronic communication shall specify:

(a) The identity of the person, if known, whose communications are to be intercepted.

(b) The nature and location of the communications facilities as to which, or the place where, authority to intercept is granted.

(c) A particular description of the type of communication sought to be intercepted and a statement of the particular offense to which it relates.

(d) The identity of the agency authorized to intercept the communications and of the person authorizing the application.

(e) The period of time during which such interception is authorized, including a statement as to whether or not the interception shall automatically terminate when the described communication has been first obtained.

633 A search warrant An order authorizing the interception of a wire, oral, or electronic communication shall, upon the request of the applicant, direct that a provider of wire or electronic communication service, landlord, custodian, or other person shall furnish the applicant forthwith all information, facilities, and technical assistance necessary to accomplish the interception unobtrusively and with a minimum of interference with the services that such service provider, landlord, custodian, or person is according the person whose communications are to be intercepted.

The obligation of a provider of wire, oral, or electronic communication service under such a search warrant an order may include, but is not limited to, conducting an in-progress trace during an interception, or providing other assistance to support the investigation as may be specified in the search warrant order.

Any provider of wire or electronic communication service, landlord, custodian, or other person furnishing such facilities or technical assistance shall be compensated therefor by the applicant for reasonable expenses incurred in providing such facilities or assistance.

(5) No search warrant order entered under this section may authorize or approve the interception of any wire, oral, or electronic communication for any period longer than is necessary to achieve the objective of the authorization or in any event longer than 30 days.

Such 30-day period begins on the day on which the agent or officer of the law enforcement agency first begins to conduct an interception under the search warrant order or 10 days after the search warrant is approved order is entered, whichever occurs earlier.

Extensions of a search warrant an order may be granted but only upon application for an extension made in accordance with subsection (1) and upon the court making the findings required by subsection (3).

The period of extension shall be no longer than the authorizing judge deems necessary to achieve the purposes for which it was granted and in no event for longer than 30 days.

Every search warrant order and extension thereof shall contain a provision that the authorization to intercept shall be executed as soon as practicable, shall be conducted in such a way as to minimize the interception of communications not otherwise subject to interception under ss.

934.03-934.09, and must terminate upon attainment of the authorized objective or in any event in 30 days.

If the intercepted communication is in code or foreign language and an expert in that foreign language or code is not reasonably available during the interception period, minimization may be accomplished as soon as practicable after such interception.

An interception under ss.

934.03-934.09 may be conducted in whole or in part by government personnel or by an individual operating under a contract with the government, acting under the supervision of an agent or officer of the law enforcement agency authorized to conduct the interception.

(6) Whenever a search warrant an order authorizing interception is granted entered pursuant to ss.

934.03-934.09, the search warrant order may require reports to be made to the judge who issued the search warrant order showing what progress has been made toward achievement of the authorized objective and the need for continued interception.

Such reports shall be made at such intervals as the judge may require.

(7) Notwithstanding any other provision of this chapter, any investigative or law enforcement officer specially designated by the Governor, the Attorney General, the statewide prosecutor, or a state attorney acting under this chapter, who reasonably determines that:

(a) An emergency exists that:

1. Involves immediate danger of death or serious physical injury to any person, the danger of escape of a prisoner, or conspiratorial activities threatening the security interest of the nation or state;

and 2. Requires that a wire, oral, or electronic communication be intercepted before a search warrant an order authorizing such interception can, with due diligence, be obtained;

and (b) There are grounds upon which a search warrant an order could be entered under this chapter to authorize such interception 707 may intercept such wire, oral, or electronic communication if an application for a search warrant an order approving the interception is made in accordance with this section within 48 hours after the interception has occurred or begins to occur.

In the absence of a search warrant an order, such interception shall immediately terminate when the communication sought is obtained or when the application for the search warrant order is denied, whichever is earlier.

If such application for approval is denied, or in any other case in which the interception is terminated without a search warrant an order having been issued, the contents of any wire, oral, or electronic communication intercepted shall be treated as having been obtained in violation of s.

934.03(4), and an inventory shall be served as provided for in paragraph (8)(e) on the person named in the application.

(8)(a) The contents of any wire, oral, or electronic communication intercepted by any means authorized by ss.

934.03 934.09 shall, if possible, be recorded on tape or wire or other comparable device.

The recording of the contents of any wire, oral, or electronic communication under this subsection shall be kept in such a way as will protect the recording from editing or other alterations.

Immediately upon the expiration of the period of the search warrant order, or extensions thereof, such recordings shall be made available to the judge approving the search warrant issuing such order and sealed under his or her directions.

Custody of the recordings shall be wherever the judge orders.

They shall not be destroyed except upon an order of the issuing or denying judge, or that judge’s successor in office, and in any event shall be kept for 10 years.

Duplicate recordings may be made for use or disclosure pursuant to the provisions of s.

934.08(1) and (2) for investigations, or for purposes of discovery as required by law.

(b) The presence of the seal provided for by this subsection, or a satisfactory explanation for the absence thereof, shall be a prerequisite for the use or disclosure of the contents of any wire, oral, or electronic communication or evidence derived therefrom under s.

934.08(3), as required by federal law.

(c) Applications made and search warrants orders granted under ss.

934.03-934.09 shall be sealed by the judge.

Custody of the applications and search warrants orders shall be wherever the judge directs.

As required by federal law, such applications and search warrants orders shall be disclosed only for purposes of discovery or upon a showing of good cause before a judge of competent jurisdiction and shall not be destroyed except on order of the issuing or denying judge, or that judge’s successor in office, and in any event shall be kept for 10 years.

(d) Any violation of the provisions of this subsection may be punished as contempt of the issuing or denying judge.

(e) Within a reasonable time but not later than 90 days after the termination of the period of a search warrant an order or extensions thereof, the issuing or denying judge shall cause to be served on the persons named in the search warrant order or the application, and such other parties to intercepted communications as the judge may determine in his or her discretion to be in the interest of justice, an inventory which shall include notice of:

1. The fact of the approval of the search warrant entry of the order or the application.

2. The date of the approval of the search warrant entry and the period of authorized, approved, or disapproved interception, or the denial of the application.

3. The fact that during the period wire, oral, or electronic communications were or were not intercepted.

772 The judge, upon the filing of a motion, may make available to such person or the person’s counsel for inspection such portions of the intercepted communications, applications, and search warrants orders as the judge determines to be in the interest of justice.

On an ex parte showing of good cause to a judge of competent jurisdiction, the serving of the inventory required by this paragraph may be postponed.

(9) As required by federal law, The contents of any intercepted wire, oral, or electronic communication or evidence derived therefrom shall not be received in evidence or otherwise disclosed in any trial, hearing, or other proceeding unless each party, not less than 10 days before the trial, hearing, or proceeding, has been furnished with a copy of the search warrant court order and accompanying application under which the interception was authorized or approved.

This 10-day period may be waived by the judge if he or she finds that it was not possible to furnish the party with the above information 10 days before the trial, hearing, or proceeding and that the party will not be prejudiced by the delay in receiving such information.

(10)(a) An Any aggrieved person before or in any trial, hearing, or proceeding in or before any court, department, officer, agency, regulatory body, or other authority may move to suppress the contents of any intercepted wire, oral, or electronic communication, or evidence derived therefrom, on the grounds that:

1. The communication was unlawfully intercepted;

2. The search warrant order of authorization or approval under which it was intercepted is insufficient on its face;

or 3. The interception was not made in conformity with the search warrant order of authorization or approval.

(b) Except as otherwise provided in the applicable Florida Rules of Criminal Procedure, in a criminal matter:

1. Such motion shall be made before the trial, hearing, or proceeding unless there was no opportunity to make such motion or the person was not aware of the grounds of the motion.

2. If the motion is granted, the contents of the intercepted wire or oral communication, or evidence derived therefrom, shall be treated as having been obtained in violation of ss.

934.03-934.09 and are not admissible as evidence.

3. The judge, upon the filing of such motion by the aggrieved person, may make available to the aggrieved person or his or her counsel for inspection such portions of the intercepted communication or evidence derived therefrom as the judge determines to be in the interest of justice.

(c)(b) In addition to any other right to appeal, the state shall have the right to appeal from an order granting a motion to suppress made under paragraph (a) or the denial of an application for a search warrant an order of approval if the attorney shall certify to the judge or other official granting such motion or denying such application that the appeal is not taken for purposes of delay.

Such appeal shall be taken within 30 days after the date the order was entered and shall be diligently prosecuted.

(d)(c) The remedies and sanctions described in ss.

934.03 934.10 with respect to the interception of electronic communications are the only judicial remedies and sanctions for violations of those sections involving such communications.

(11) The requirements of subparagraph (1)(b)2.

and paragraph (3)(d) relating to the specification of the facilities from which, or the place where, the communication is to be intercepted do not apply if:

(a) In the case of an application with respect to the interception of an oral communication:

1. The application is by an agent or officer of a law enforcement agency and is approved by the Governor, the Attorney General, the statewide prosecutor, or a state attorney.

2. The application contains a full and complete statement as to why such specification is not practical and identifies the person committing the offense and whose communications are to be intercepted.

3. The judge finds that such specification is not practical.

(b) In the case of an application with respect to a wire or electronic communication:

1. The application is by an agent or officer of a law enforcement agency and is approved by the Governor, the Attorney General, the statewide prosecutor, or a state attorney.

2. The application identifies the person believed to be committing the offense and whose communications are to be intercepted and the applicant makes a showing that there is probable cause to believe that the person’s actions could have the effect of thwarting interception from a specified facility or that the person whose communications are to be intercepted has removed, or is likely to remove, himself or herself to another judicial circuit within the state.

3. The judge finds that such showing has been adequately made.

4. The search warrant order authorizing or approving the interception is limited to interception only for such time as it is reasonable to presume that the person identified in the application is or was reasonably proximate to the instrument through which such communication will be or was transmitted.

865 Consistent with this paragraph, a judge of competent jurisdiction may authorize interception within this state, whether the interception is within or outside the court’s jurisdiction, if the application for the interception makes a showing that some activity or conspiracy believed to be related to, or in furtherance of, the criminal predicate for the requested interception has occurred or will likely occur, or the communication to be intercepted or expected to be intercepted is occurring or will likely occur, in whole or in part, within the jurisdiction of the court where the order is being sought.

(12) If an interception of a communication is to be carried out pursuant to subsection (11), such interception may not begin until the facilities from which, or the place where, the communication is to be intercepted is ascertained by the person implementing the interception search warrant order.

A provider of wire or electronic communications service that has received a an search warrant order as provided under paragraph (11)(b) may petition the court to modify or quash the search warrant order on the ground that the interception cannot be performed in a timely or reasonable fashion.

The court, upon notice to the state, shall decide such a petition expeditiously.

(13) Consistent with this section, a judge of competent jurisdiction may authorize interception within this state, whether the interception is within or outside the court’s jurisdiction, if the application for the interception makes a showing that some activity or conspiracy believed to be related to, or in furtherance of, the criminal predicate for the requested interception has occurred or will likely occur, or the communication to be intercepted or expected to be intercepted is occurring or will likely occur, in whole or in part, within the jurisdiction of the court where the search warrant is being sought.

Section 9. Subsection (2) of section 934.10, Florida Statutes, is amended, and subsection (1) of that section is republished, to read:

934.10 Civil remedies.— (1) Any person whose wire, oral, or electronic communication is intercepted, disclosed, or used in violation of ss.

934.03-934.09 shall have a civil cause of action against any person or entity who intercepts, discloses, or uses, or procures any other person or entity to intercept, disclose, or use, such communications and shall be entitled to recover from any such person or entity which engaged in that violation such relief as may be appropriate, including:

(a) Preliminary or equitable or declaratory relief as may be appropriate;

(b) Actual damages, but not less than liquidated damages computed at the rate of $100 a day for each day of violation or $1,000, whichever is higher;

(c) Punitive damages;

and (d) A reasonable attorney’s fee and other litigation costs reasonably incurred.

(2) A good faith reliance on:

(a) A search warrant court order, subpoena, or legislative authorization as provided in ss.

934.03-934.09;, (b) A request of an investigative or law enforcement officer under s.

934.09(7);, or (c) A good faith determination that Florida or federal law, other than 18 U.S.C.

s.

2511(2)(d), authorized permitted the conduct complained of, 926 shall constitutes constitute a complete defense to any civil or criminal, or administrative action arising out of such conduct under the laws of this state.

Section 10. Section 934.21, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:

(a) Intentionally accesses without authorization a facility through which an electronic communication service is provided, or (b) Intentionally exceeds an authorization to access such facility, 168940 and thereby obtains, alters, or prevents authorized access to a wire or electronic communication while it is in electronic storage in such system shall be punished as provided in subsection (2).

(a) By the person or entity providing a wire, oral, or electronic communications service, including through cellular phones, portablemicrophone-enabled electronichousehold communication devices, or microphone-enabledportable householdelectronic communication devices;

(b) By a user of a wire, oral, or electronic communications service, including through cellular phones, portablemicrophone-enabled electronichousehold communication devices, or microphone-enabledportable householdelectronic communication devices, with respect to a communication of or intended for that user;

934.09934.09, or, s.

934.23;,934.23, or s.

934.24934.24; (d) In chapter 933;

(d) In chapter 933;

Section 4. Section11. Section 934.42, Florida Statutes, is amended to read:

(2)(1) An investigative or law enforcement officer may make application to a judge of competent jurisdiction for a search warrant an order authorizing or approving real-time location tracking or the acquisition of historical location data in the possession of the provider the installation and use of a mobile tracking device.

(b) A statement setting forth a reasonable period of time that the mobile tracking device may be used or the location data may be obtained in real time, not to exceed 45 days from the date the search warrant is issued.

(4)(3) Upon application made as provided under subsection (3) (2), the court, if it finds probable cause that the certification and finds that the statements required by subsection (3) (2) have been made in the application, must grant a search warrant shall enter an ex parte order authorizing real-timereal time location tracking the installation and use of a mobile tracking device or the acquisition of historical location data.

Such search warrant order may authorize the location tracking use of the mobile tracking device within the jurisdiction of the court and outside that jurisdiction but within the State of Florida if the mobilelocation tracking device is initiated installed within the jurisdiction of the court.

The search warrant must command the investigative or law enforcement officer to complete any installationinitiation of the location tracking or execution of the search warrant for historical location data authorized by the search warrant within a specified period of time not to exceed 10 calendar days.

(5)(4) A court may not require greater specificity or additional information beyond that which is required by law and this section as a requisite for issuing a search warrant an order.

(6) Within 10 days after the time period specified in paragraph (3)(b) has ended, the investigative or law enforcement officer executing a search warrant must return the search warrant to the issuing judge.

When the search warrant is authorizing the acquisition of historical location data, the investigative or law enforcement officer executing the search warrant must return the search warrant to the issuing judge within 10 days after receipt of the records.

The investigative or law enforcement officer may do so by reliable electronic means.

(7) Within 10 days after the time period specified in paragraph (3)(b) has ended, the investigative or law enforcement officer executing a search warrant must serve a copy of the search warrant on the person who, or whose property, was tracked.

When the search warrant is authorizing the acquisition of historical location data, the investigative or law enforcement officer executing the search warrant must serve a copy of the search warrant on the person whose data was obtained within 10 days after receipt of the records.

and b. Requires real-time location tracking before a search warrant authorizing such tracking can, with due diligence, be obtained;

and 2. There are grounds upon which a search warrant could be issued under this chapter to authorize such tracking, 3081089 may engage in real-time location tracking if, within 48 hours after the tracking has occurred or begins to occur, a search warrant approving the tracking is issued in accordance with this section.

(b) In the absence of an authorizing search warrant, such tracking must immediately terminate when the information sought is obtained, when the application for the search warrant is denied, or when 48 hours have lapsed since the tracking began, whichever is earlier.

Section 5. This12. For the purpose of incorporating the amendments made by this act shallto takesections effect934.03 Julyand 1,934.07, 2019.Florida Statutes, in a reference thereto, paragraph (b) of subsection (2) of section 934.22, Florida Statutes, is reenacted to read:

934.22 Voluntary disclosure of customer communications or records.— (2) A provider described in subsection (1) may divulge the contents of a communication:

(b) As otherwise authorized in s.

934.03(2)(a), s.

934.07, or s.

934.23.

Section 13. For the purpose of incorporating the amendments made by this act to sections 934.09 and 934.21, Florida Statutes, in references thereto, subsections (1) and (4) of section 934.27, Florida Statutes, are reenacted to read:

934.27 Civil action:

relief;

damages;

defenses.— (1) Except as provided in s.

934.23(5), any provider of electronic communication service, or subscriber or customer thereof, aggrieved by any violation of ss.

934.21-934.28 in which the conduct constituting the violation is engaged in with a knowing or intentional state of mind may, in a civil action, recover from the person or entity which engaged in that violation such relief as is appropriate.

(4) A good faith reliance on any of the following is a complete defense to any civil or criminal action brought under ss.

934.21-934.28:

(a) A court warrant or order, a subpoena, or a statutory authorization, including, but not limited to, a request of an investigative or law enforcement officer to preserve records or other evidence, as provided in s.

934.23(7).

(b) A request of an investigative or law enforcement officer under s.

934.09(7).

(c) A good faith determination that s.

934.03(3) permitted the conduct complained of.

Section 14. For the purpose of incorporating the amendment made by this act to section 934.21, Florida Statutes, in a reference thereto, subsection (6) of section 934.23, Florida Statutes, is reenacted to read:

934.23 Required disclosure of customer communications or records.— (6) No cause of action shall lie in any court against any provider of wire or electronic communication service, its officers, employees, agents, or other specified persons for providing information, facilities, or assistance in accordance with the terms of a court order, warrant, subpoena, or certification under ss.

934.21-934.28.

Section 15. For the purpose of incorporating the amendment made by this act to section 934.21, Florida Statutes, in references thereto, subsections (6) and (7) of section 934.24, Florida Statutes, are reenacted to read:

934.24 Backup preservation;

customer notification;

challenges by customer.— (6) Within 14 days after notice by the investigative or law enforcement officer to the subscriber or customer under subsection (2), the subscriber or customer may file a motion to quash the subpoena or vacate the court order seeking contents of electronic communications, with copies served upon the investigative or law enforcement officer and with written notice of such challenge to the service provider.

A motion to vacate a court order must be filed in the court which issued the order.

A motion to quash a subpoena must be filed in the circuit court in the circuit from which the subpoena issued.

Such motion or application must contain an affidavit or sworn statement:

(a) Stating that the applicant is a subscriber or customer of the service from which the contents of electronic communications maintained for her or him have been sought, and (b) Stating the applicant’s reasons for believing that the records sought are not relevant to a legitimate law enforcement inquiry or that there has not been substantial compliance with the provisions of ss.

934.21-934.28 in some other respect.

(7) Except as otherwise obtained under paragraph (3)(a), service must be made under this section upon an investigative or law enforcement officer by delivering or mailing by registered or certified mail a copy of the papers to the person, office, or department specified in the notice which the subscriber or customer has received pursuant to ss.

934.21-934.28.

For the purposes of this subsection, the term “delivering” shall be construed in accordance with the definition of “delivery” as provided in Rule 1.080, Florida Rules of Civil Procedure.

Section 16. For the purpose of incorporating the amendment made by this act to section 934.21, Florida Statutes, in a reference thereto, subsection (5) of section 934.25, Florida Statutes, is reenacted to read:

934.25 Delayed notice.— (5) Upon the expiration of the period of delay of notification under subsection (1) or subsection (4), the investigative or law enforcement officer must serve upon or deliver by registered or first-class mail to the subscriber or customer a copy of the process or request together with notice which:

(a) States with reasonable specificity the nature of the law enforcement inquiry, and (b) Informs the subscriber or customer:

1. That information maintained for such subscriber or customer by the service provider named in the process or request was supplied to or requested by the investigative or law enforcement officer and the date on which such information was so supplied or requested.

2. That notification of such subscriber or customer was delayed.

3. What investigative or law enforcement officer or what court made the certification or determination pursuant to which that delay was made.

4. Which provision of ss.

934.21-934.28 allowed such delay.

Section 17. For the purpose of incorporating the amendment made by this act to section 934.21, Florida Statutes, in a reference thereto, section 934.28, Florida Statutes, is reenacted to read:

934.28 Exclusivity of remedies and sanctions.—The remedies and sanctions described in ss.

934.21-934.27 are the only judicial remedies and sanctions for violation of those sections.

Section 18. This act shall take effect July 1, 2019.