Sharpe v. State

Summary

The Nevada Supreme Court affirmed Phillip Douglas Sharpe’s judgment of conviction for trafficking in a controlled substance following a guilty plea. The court held that Nevada’s wiretap statutes, specifically NRS 179.455 and NRS 179.460, permit the interception of cellular telephone calls and text messages because those communications qualify as wire communications. The court also concluded that Nevada’s law was not preempted by federal wiretap law.

Holdings

1. NRS 179.455's definition of 'wire communication' includes cellular telephone calls and text messages because they are 'any communication' made in whole or in part by the aid of wire, cable, or another like connection between the point of origin and the point of reception.
2. Nevada's wiretap law was not preempted because, despite differing statutory terminology, it allowed interception of cellular telephone calls and text messages to the same extent as federal law and was therefore not less restrictive.
3. The district court did not err in concluding that Nevada law permitted interception of Sharpe's cellular telephone calls and text messages, and the judgment of conviction was affirmed.

Questions Presented

1. Whether Nevada's wiretap statutes permit the interception of cellular telephone calls and SMS text messages under the statutory definition of 'wire communication.'
2. Whether Nevada's failure to update its wiretap statutes after federal law recognized a separate category of electronic communications rendered Nevada law less restrictive than federal law and therefore preempted.
3. Whether the district court erred in denying Sharpe's other pretrial motions and motions to suppress.

Disposition

affirmed