SUBCHAPTER B
WIRE, ELECTRONIC OR ORAL COMMUNICATION
Sec.
5703. Interception, disclosure or use of wire, electronic or oral communications.
5704. Exceptions to prohibition of interception and disclosure of communications.
5705. Possession, sale, distribution, manufacture or advertisement of electronic, mechanical
or other devices and telecommunication identification interception devices.
5706. Exceptions to prohibitions in possession, sale, distribution, manufacture or advertisement
of electronic, mechanical or other devices.
5707. Seizure and forfeiture of electronic, mechanical or other devices.
5708. Order authorizing interception of wire, electronic or oral communications.
5709. Application for order.
5710. Grounds for entry of order.
5711. Privileged communications.
5712. Issuance of order and effect.
5712.1. Target-specific orders.
5713. Emergency situations.
5713.1. Emergency hostage and barricade situations.
5714. Recording of intercepted communications.
5715. Sealing of applications, orders and supporting papers.
5716. Service of inventory and inspection of intercepted communications.
5717. Investigative disclosure or use of contents of wire, electronic or oral communications
or derivative evidence.
5718. Interception of communications relating to other offenses.
5719. Unlawful use or disclosure of existence of order concerning intercepted communication.
5720. Service of copy of order and application before disclosure of intercepted communication
in trial, hearing or proceeding.
5721. Suppression of contents of intercepted communication or derivative evidence (Repealed).
5721.1. Evidentiary disclosure of contents of intercepted communication or derivative
evidence.
5722. Report by issuing or denying judge.
5723. Annual reports and records of Attorney General and district attorneys.
5724. Training.
5725. Civil action for unlawful interception, disclosure or use of wire, electronic or oral
communication.
5726. Action for removal from office or employment.
5727. Expiration (Repealed).
5728. Injunction against illegal interception.
5729. Public access (Repealed).
Subchapter Heading. The heading of Subchapter B was added October 21, 1988, P.L.1000, No.115, effective
immediately.
Cross References. Subchapter B is referred to in section 5702 of this title.
§ 5703. Interception, disclosure or use of wire, electronic or oral communications.
Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, a person is guilty of a felony of the
third degree if he:
(1) intentionally intercepts, endeavors to intercept, or procures any other person to
intercept or endeavor to intercept any wire, electronic or oral communication;
(2) intentionally discloses or endeavors to disclose to any other person the contents
of any wire, electronic or oral communication, or evidence derived therefrom, knowing
or having reason to know that the information was obtained through the interception
of a wire, electronic or oral communication; or
(3) intentionally uses or endeavors to use the contents of any wire, electronic or oral
communication, or evidence derived therefrom, knowing or having reason to know, that
the information was obtained through the interception of a wire, electronic or oral
communication.
(Oct. 21, 1988, P.L.1000, No.115, eff. imd.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
124
cases (
37 in the last 5 years), 1976–2026 · leading case:
Bartnicki v. Vopper, 532 U.S. 514 (2001).
Bartnicki v. Vopper, 532 U.S. 514 (2001).
· cites it 4× “§ 2511 (1)(c); 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5703 (2) (2000), and one cannot "disclose" what is already in the public domain.”
Commonwealth v. Upshur, 924 A.2d 642 (Pa. 2007).
· cites it 6× “See 18 Pa.C.S. § 5703. Thus, the Commonwealth maintains that, even if the tape was subject to the right of access, the trial court abused its discretion in finding that playing the tape in open court and allowing WPXI to obtain a copy of the transcript of the proceeding did not…”
PA State Police, Aplt. v. Grove, M., 161 A.3d 877 (Pa. 2017).
· cites it 2× “fficer; (B) is in close proximity to the individuals' oral communication; (C) is using an electronic, mechanical or other device which has been approved under section 5706(b)(4) (relating to exceptions to prohibitions in possession, sale, distribution, manufacture or…”
Donna Javitz v. Cnty. of Luzerne, 940 F.3d 858 (3rd Cir. 2019).
· cites it 2× “3 employee, AFSCME union representative Paula Schnelly, had recorded the meeting without Javitz’s consent—a crime under 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5703 . Javitz reported her concern to her supervisor, David Parsnik, who agreed that the meeting may have been recorded.”
Commonwealth v. Smith, 136 A.3d 170 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2016).
· cites it 4× “See 18 Pa.C.S. § 5703. Because the issue raised herein is one of statutory construction, our review is guided by the following principles, derived from the Statutory Construction Act (“SCA”), 1 Pa.”
Commonwealth v. Schaeffer, 536 A.2d 354 (Pa. 1987).
· cites it 4× “The 1978 Act, while retaining and enhancing the criminal penalties for wiretapping and other electronic interceptions of communications, see 18 Pa.C.S. § 5703, carved out limited exceptions to these general prohibitions.”
Commonwealth v. Arrington, 86 A.3d 831 (Pa. 2014).
· cites it 2× “See 18 Pa.C.S. § 5703. A violation subjects the perpetrator to criminal and civil penalties.”
Florida Star v. B. J. F., 491 U.S. 524 (1989).
· cites it 2× “18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5703 (1988). Another statute imposes civil liability on any person who "discloses" the content of tapped conversations.”
Commonwealth v. Bennett, 369 A.2d 493 (Pa. Super. Ct. 1976).
· cites it 4× “18 Pa.C.S. § 5703, as amended Dec. 27, 1974, P.”
Commonwealth v. Brachbill, 555 A.2d 82 (Pa. 1989).
· cites it 4× “§ 5704(2)(ii), and violated section 5703 of the same Act, 18 Pa.C.S. § 5703. For the reasons that follow, we agree.”
Kelly v. Borough of Carlisle, 622 F.3d 248 (3rd Cir. 2010).
“” 18 Pa. Cons.Stat. § 5703. The statute defines *257 “oral communication” as “[a]ny oral communication uttered by a person possessing an expectation that such communication is not subject to interception under circumstances justifying such expectation.”
Commonwealth v. Black, 376 A.2d 627 (Pa. 1977).
· cites it 2× “[6] *55 It is next argued that the trial court erred in allowing the wife and son of decedent to testify concerning a conversation between appellant and Williford which the witnesses overheard while listening in on extension telephones.”
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5703(1) — 22 cases
Commonwealth v. Smith, 136 A.3d 170 (Pa. Super. Ct. 2016).
“See 18 Pa.C.S. § 5703. Because the issue raised herein is one of statutory construction, our review is guided by the following principles, derived from the Statutory Construction Act (“SCA”), 1 Pa.”
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5703(2) — 12 cases
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5703(3) — 7 cases
Commonwealth v. Upshur, 924 A.2d 642 (Pa. 2007).
“See 18 Pa.C.S. § 5703. Thus, the Commonwealth maintains that, even if the tape was subject to the right of access, the trial court abused its discretion in finding that playing the tape in open court and allowing WPXI to obtain a copy of the transcript of the proceeding did not…”
— 18 Pa. Cons. Stat. § 5703(l) — 1 case
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.