Police investigation bill debated

CARSON CITY — Debate continued today on a bill to expand investigative powers of police before getting a search warrant from a Nevada judge, with backers saying it's a necessary crime-fighting tool and foes saying it's unconstitutional.

Under current law, police can subpoena a public utility to get the name and address of a person listed in utility records. SB51 would expand the information to include incoming and outgoing phone call records, power usage records, a person's birth date, Social Security or passport number, family contacts or "any additional identifying information" that a utility might have.

Responding to concerns voiced by Senate Judiciary Chairman Terry Care, D-Las Vegas, Scott Jackson, chief of the state Investigation Division, said SB51 wouldn't result in warrantless "fishing expeditions" by police.

"We don't just pick a name out of the hat and try to find out what that individual is up to," Jackson said. "There is some information that leads us to that criminal investigation."

But Orrin Johnson, a deputy Washoe County public defender, argued that SB51 could lead to police abuses. He was backed by Rebecca Gasca of the American Civil Liberties Union of Nevada.

"This bill is far, far, far too broad, when a solution already exists," Johnson said, adding that Nevada should stick with the existing process of police asking a judge for a warrant once they gather enough information "to justify cracking open and looking inside the house."

In the wrong hands, the authority sought under SB51 could be used for purposes other than crime-fighting, such as embarrassing politicians, Johnson said.

In 2007, a conservative think tank criticized Nobel Peace Prize winner Al Gore, an outspoken advocate of "green" energy, for high electric bills at his Tennessee mansion. Gore, who later installed numerous improvements to cut those bills, said he was targeted by groups opposed to his environmentalist views.

Jackson also argued that SB51 is constitutional and in line with a court ruling that has held there's no valid expectation of privacy for information a power company gets from customers. But Johnson countered that a more recent U.S. Supreme Court ruling holds otherwise.

In previous hearings, Jackson said the information that police would get with the subpoenas would help in developing a basis for a search warrant request submitted to a judge. But Johnson said the state should stick with the judicial warrant process, which ensures that the legitimate needs of police are balanced against the legitimate rights of citizens.

Jackson also has said the subpoenas would be issued in cases where there's "reasonable suspicion" of criminal activity. But Johnson said that's a lesser legal standard than the "probable cause" standard needed to get a search warrant from a judge.