Oregon Revised Statutes Chapter 133 § 133.726 — Interception of oral communication without order; order for interception of

Interception of oral communication without order; order for interception of oral communication; application; grounds for issuance; contents of order; penalties. (1) Notwithstanding ORS 133.724, under the circumstances described in this section, a law enforcement officer is authorized to intercept an oral communication to which the officer or a person under the direct supervision of the officer is a party, without obtaining an order for the interception of a wire, electronic or oral communication under ORS 133.724. (2) For purposes of this section and ORS 133.736, a person is a party to an oral communication if the oral communication is made in the person’s immediate presence and is audible to the person regardless of whether the communication is specifically directed to the person. (3) An ex parte order for intercepting an oral communication in any county of this state under this section may be issued by any judge as defined in ORS 133.525 upon written application made upon oath or affirmation of the district attorney or a deputy district attorney authorized by the district attorney for the county in which the order is sought or upon the oath or affirmation of any peace officer as defined in ORS 133.005. The application shall include: (a) The name of the applicant and the applicant’s authority to make the application; (b) A statement demonstrating that there is probable cause to believe that a person whose oral communication is to be intercepted is engaged in committing, has committed or is about to commit a particular felony, or a misdemeanor under ORS 167.007 or 167.008, and that intercepting the oral communication will yield evidence thereof; and (c) The identity of the person, if known, suspected of committing the crime and whose oral communication is to be intercepted. (4) The judge may require the applicant to furnish further testimony or documentary evidence in support of the application. (5) Upon examination of the application and evidence, the judge may enter an ex parte order, as requested or as modified, authorizing or approving the interception of an oral communication within the state if the judge determines on the basis of the facts submitted by the applicant that: (a) There is probable cause to believe that a person is engaged in committing, has committed or is about to commit a particular felony, or a misdemeanor under ORS 167.007 or 167.008; and (b) There is probable cause to believe that the oral communication to be obtained will contain evidence concerning that crime. (6) An order authorizing or approving the interception of an oral communication under this section must specify: (a) The identity of the person, if known, whose oral communication is to be intercepted; (b) A statement identifying the particular crime to which the oral communication is expected to relate; (c) The agency authorized under the order to intercept the oral communication; (d) The name and office of the applicant and the signature and title of the issuing judge; (e) A period of time after which the order shall expire; and (f) A statement that the order authorizes only the interception of an oral communication to which a law enforcement officer or a person under the direct supervision of a law enforcement officer is a party. (7) An order under ORS 133.724 or this section is not required when a law enforcement officer intercepts an oral communication to which the officer or a person under the direct supervision of the officer is a party if the oral communication is made by a person whom the officer has probable cause to believe has committed, is engaged in committing or is about to commit: (a) A crime punishable as a felony under ORS 475.752, 475.786 to 475.894, 475.906, 475C.005 to 475C.525 or 475C.770 to 475C.919 or as a misdemeanor under ORS 167.007 or 167.008; or (b) Any other crime punishable as a felony if the circumstances at the time the oral communication is intercepted are of such exigency that it would be unreasonable to obtain a court order under ORS 133.724 or this section. (8) A law enforcement officer who intercepts an oral communication pursuant to this section may not intentionally fail to record and preserve the oral communication in its entirety. A law enforcement officer, or a person under the direct supervision of the officer, who is authorized under this section to intercept an oral communication is not required to exclude from the interception an oral communication made by a person for whom probable cause does not exist if the officer or the person under the officer’s direct supervision is a party to the oral communication. (9) A law enforcement officer may not divulge the contents of an oral communication intercepted under this section before a preliminary hearing or trial in which an oral communication is going to be introduced as evidence against a person except: (a) To a superior officer or other official with whom the la