Cal. Codes » Penal Code / PART 1. OF CRIMES AND PUNISHMENTS / TITLE 15. MISCELLANEOUS CRIMES / CHAPTER 1.5. Invasion of Privacy
California Codes

Cal. Penal Code § 636.5 (2026)

Invasion of Privacy

✓ leginfo export of Sept. 26, 2026 (applied Oct. 1, 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov JustiaCode on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Any person not authorized by the sender, who intercepts any public safety radio service communication, by use of a scanner or any other means, for the purpose of using that communication to assist in the commission of a criminal offense or to avoid or escape arrest, trial, conviction, or punishment or who divulges to any person he or she knows to be a suspect in the commission of any criminal offense, the existence, contents, substance, purport, effect or meaning of that communication concerning the offense with the intent that the suspect may avoid or escape from arrest, trial, conviction, or punishment is guilty of a misdemeanor.

Nothing in this section shall preclude prosecution of any person under Section 31 or 32.

As used in this section, “public safety radio service communication” means a communication authorized by the Federal Communications Commission to be transmitted by a station in the public safety radio service.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1995–2023 · leading case: People v. Glaser, 902 P.2d 729 (Cal. 1995).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
People v. Glaser, 902 P.2d 729 (Cal. 1995). “(a)) and use of a scanner to intercept police radio communications (Pen. Code, § 636.5). He *362 moved in the superior court to suppress the evidence found in the searches of his truck and person.”
People v. Burnes, 242 Cal. App. 4th 1452 (Cal. Ct. App. 2015). “(a)(1); count 8), intercepting and divulging police radio communication (Pen. Code, § 636.5; count 9), hit-and-run driving resulting in property damage (Veh.”
People v. Vansteen, No. C096924 (Cal. Ct. App. Aug. 7, 2023). “5, arguing evidence of the offenses was obtained in an illegal search of his vehicle. The trial court denied the motion.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.