If the officer has stopped a vehicle for a traffic violation he may intercept an oral communication. If the officer is a party to the communication and identifies himself as an officer to the other parties prior to the interception and informs all other parties to the communication of the interception at the beginning of the communication and the oral interception is part of a video taping. Maryland's statute precludes admitting evidence which, though validly intercepted under DC law, violates Maryland's law. Civil action is authorized. Exceptions include a business use exception as in Maryland.
Civil action is authorized.
It is a misdemeanor to trespass on private property to subject a person to eavesdropping or surveillance. However, according to Navarra v. Bache Halsey 510 F Supp. 831, the state's wiretapping and eavesdropping statute subjected an individual who listened to a conversation on a telephone extension with the knowledge and consent of only one party to criminal and civil penalties because such an action violated the speaker's privacy. Civil action is authorized.