Texas law on any date › Attorney General opinions
Attorney General Opinion JM-0983
Issued November 21, 1988
Later treatment: Withdrawn by (from the Attorney General's list of opinions overruled, modified, superseded or withdrawn)
Re: Authority of Harris County to establish a system which monitors telephone calls
Cites: PE §153, PE §Title, PE §47
The Attorney General's page · official PDF
November
21, 1988
Honorable
Mike Driscoll
Harris County Attorney
1001 Preston,
Suite 634
Houston,
Texas
77002
opinion NO. JR-983
Re:
Authority
of Harris County
to
establish
a
system
which
monitors
telephone
calls
(RQ-1497)
Dear Mr. Driscoll:
You ask
whether
Harris
County may
utilize
a
station
message
detail recording
system to monitor
telephone
calls.
YOU furnish the following
background
information:
The
Station
Message
Detail
Recording
(SMDR) is a computer
which interfaces
with
a
PBX switchboard
via a data point
information
switch.
The
SMDR records
every
electronic
event related to the long distance
functions
of a telephone
line.
Briefly,
by means
of
the SMDR, a record is
made of the number
of
long
distance
calls
made,
the
telephone
number
called,
the
County
telephone
from
which the call was made, length of each call,
time
of
the
call
and
the
long
distance
carrier used.
Incoming
traffic
to
county
telephone
instruments
is
also
recorded,
although
no record is made of the originating
telephone
number.
While the system
is currently
used by
the county
to
monitor
long distance
telephone
calls, you advise that
the
county contemplates
extending
its use to local calls.
You state that
the system is
presently
being used
by
the Harris
County
Department
of
Communications
for
the
following
purposes:
Harris County
Department
of
Communications
uses the SMDR
to monitor
volume,
to
enable
the system to switch calls if a telephone
PBX
p. 5018
Honorable
Mike Driscoll
- Page 2
(JR-983)
switching
cabinet
becomes
overloaded:
for
billing,
and gathering
administrative
data.
The SMDR
helps
the
County
to
identify
unauthorized
long
distance
telephone
usage
and avoid waste of County funds.
The planned
extension
of
"its application
to
gather
local telephone
call
data"
results
from
the
fact
that
"substantial
amounts
of
county
funds
are
expended
on
'directory
assistance'
and 'emergency
break-in8
calls."
YOU
advise that the purpose
for
utilizing
the system for
local
calls is as follows:
By monitoring
local telephone
call data an
assessment
could be made of the necessity
of
such calls and
measures
instituted
to
avoid
unnecessary
expenditure
of county funds.
Article
16.03 of the Penal Code prohibits
the use of
a
pen register
but provides
for exceptions
and
affirmative
defenses.
Article
16.03 provides:
(a) Except as authorizedby
a court
order
obtained
under
Article
18.21,
Code
of
Criminal
Procedure,
1965, a person commits
an
offense
if he knowingly
installs
or
utilizes
a pen
register
to
record telephone
numbers
dialed from a telephone
instrument.
(b) In this
section,
'pen
resister'
has
the same
meaninc
as
is siven
that term
in
rticle 18.21,
Code of
Criminal
Procedure,
!L.
(c) It is an exception
to the
application
of Subsection
(a) of
this section
that
an
officer,
employee,
or
agent of a
communica-
tions common carrier,
as defined by
Section
153(h),
Title
47,
United
States
Code,
installs
or utilizes
a device or equipment
to
record the
numbers dialed
from a
telephone
instrument
in the
normal course of
business
of the
carrier
or
assists a
peace
officer
commissioned
by
the
Department
of
Public
Safety in
executing
an order
issued
under
Article
18.21,
Code of
Criminal
Procedure,
1965.
p. 5019
Honorable
Mike Driscoll
- Page 3
(JM-983)
(d) It is an affirmative
defense
to prose-
cution under this section that the
installa-
tion or
utilization
of
a pen
register
was
made by an officer,
agent, or employee
of
a
lawful
enterprise
while
engaged
'
activity that is a necessarv
incident
:E
tk:
rr
e
on 0
0
pr nertv
of
or
services
nrovided
bv
the
gn:ernrise.
and was not made for the
nurnose
of cratheriag information
for a law enforce-
ment acencv or nrivate
investiaative
acencv.
other than information
related to the theft
f
0
c
un'
ices
provided
bv the ented.
(e) An offense
under
this section
is
a
felony of the third degree.
(0 A Pen
register
used
in violation
of
this section
is subject to seizure and may be
forfeited
to the Department
of Public
Safety
in the
manner
provided
for
disposition
of
seized property
by
Article
18.18,
Code
of
Criminal
Procedure,
1965,
as
amended.
(Emphasis
added.)
"Pen register"
is defined
in article
18.21 of the
Code
of Criminal
Procedure
as follows:
'Pen
register'
means
a
mechanical
or
electronic
device
that
attaches
to
telephone
line
and is
capable
of
recordin;
outgoing
numbers dialed from that line but is
not capable
of recording
the origin
of
an
incoming
communication
to that
line or
the
content of
a communication
carried
between
that line and another
line.
Article
18.21 provides
for a procedure
whereby
a
judge
may order the installation
and utilization
of a pen register
by an
officer
commissioned
by the
Department
of
Public
Safety.
The information
you
furnish reflects
that the
system
presently
used by
the county records
the telephone
number
called.
Such a device falls within the definition
of a "pen
register"
as that term is defined
in article
18.21.
Section
(c) of article
16.03 provides
for an
exception
to the prohibition
of the use
of a "pen register*' where
I1
a
P. 5020
Honorable
Mike Driscoll
- Page 4
(JM-983)
communications
common carrier,
as defined by Section
153(h),
Title 47, United States Code, installs
or utilizes
a
device
or equipment
to record the numbers
dialed."
Section
153(h), 47
U.S.C.A.,
defines
"common
carrier"
as follows:
'Common carrier'
or *carrier*
means
any
person engaged
as a common carrier
for
hire,
in interstate
or
foreign
communication
by
wire or
radio or
in interstate
or
foreign
radio transmission
of energy,
except
where
reference
is
made
to
common
carriers
not
subject to this chapter:
but a person engaged
in radio broadcasting
shall not, insofar
as
such person
is so engaged,
be deemed a common
carrier.
Clearly,
a county is not a llcommon carrier,"
nor is the
equipment
in question
apparently
owned by a common
carrier
and operated
for the county.
While use by the county
of a mechanical
or
electronic
device that attaches
to a
telephone
line and is capable
of
recording
outgoing
numbers
such
as the system you
describe
is prohibited,
section
(d)
of article
16.03 provides
for
certain
affirmative
defenses
to prosecution.
Whether
the
county has
an affirmative
defense
under
article
16.03
is
dependent
upon
whether
the
information
gathered
by use of this
system "is a necessary
incident
to
the rendition
of service or to the protection
of property
of
or services
provided
by the enterprise,
and was not made for
the purpose
of gathering
information
for a law
enforcement
agency
or
private
investigative
agency,
other
than
information
related
to
the
theft
of
communication
information
services
provided
by
the
enterprise."1
TEE
resolution
of
these
factual
issues
is
not
within
the
province
of the opinion process.
1.
Under
article
2.04(d)
of
the
Penal
Code
the
defendant
must
prove
an
affirmative
defense
by
preponderance
of the evidence.
Graham v. State, 566
S.W.2:
941 (Tex. Crim. App. 1978).
p. 5021
Honorable
Mike Driscoll
- Page 5
(JM-983)
The use by a county of any mechanical
or
electronic
device
that
attaches
to
a
telephone
line
and is
capable of
recording
outgoing
numbers
is' prohibited
by
article
16.03 of the Penal Code.
Whether
the
county
has an affirmative
defense to a
prosecution
for such
violation
is
dependent
upon
the
resolution
of
factual
issues
that
is
not
within the province
of the opinion process.
JIM
MATTOX
Attorney
General
of Texas
MARYRELLER
First
Assistant
Attorney
General
IOU MCCRHARY
Executive
Assistant
Attorney
General
JUDGE ZOLLIE STRARLRY
Special Assistant
Attorney
General
RICK GILPIN
Chairman,
Opinion
Committee
Prepared
by Tom G. Davis
Assistant
Attorney
General
p. 5022
Attorney General opinions are persuasive, not binding on courts, and answer questions of law, not fact. Text extracted from the official PDF. Not legal advice.