Commonwealth v. Beauford

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• noting that United States Supreme Court opinions “are like opinions of sister state courts or lower federal courts,” having merely persuasive authority
• following DeJohn in rejecting federal law and finding constitutionally protected right to privacy under Article I, § 8 of the Pennsylvania Constitution in pen register of telephone numbers
• extending protection afforded under article 1, section 8 beyond limits of fourth amendment
• extending protection afforded under article 1, section 8 beyond limits of fourth amendment
• Neither a pen register nor a dialed number recorder may be installed without a judicial order based on probable cause
• “an individual’s expectation of privacy in telephone numbers he calls is reasonable, legitimate, and is protected by the State Constitution against government surveillance and intrusion without probable cause”

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).