Background

• Appellant Norman McMillan III was convicted of involuntary deviate sexual intercourse, statutory sexual assault, indecent assault, and corruption of minors based on alleged sexual acts with a minor student, T.T.
• T.T. joined the McCaskey High School Choir where McMillan taught; she trusted him and he provided rides and personal access, including kissing and sexual activity starting in 2004–2006.
• After rumors spread, T.T. told her aunt C.T., who reported to police; Detective Morgan and wiretap detectives Deeter and Blake prepared an interception plan with DA approval.
• May 1, 2008: ADA Kriner reviewed the plan and consent process; a consensual wiretap was approved for a call with McMillan, implemented May 9, 2008.
• July 21, 2008 McMillan was charged; a suppression motion arguing unlawful search and lack of reasonable grounds for the wiretap was denied after a suppression hearing (Nov. 10, 2009).
• McMillan was tried by jury and sentenced to five to ten years; appellate challenge focused on the wiretap interception under the Wiretap Act and constitutional grounds.

Issues

Key Cases Cited

• Commonwealth v. Jones, 605 Pa. 188, 988 A.2d 649 (2010) (standard for suppression findings in appellate review)
• Commonwealth v. Bomar, 573 Pa. 426, 445, 826 A.2d 831, 842 (2003) (constitutional privacy and wiretap framework)
• Commonwealth v. Cruttenden, 976 A.2d 1176 (Pa.Super. 2009) (wiretap Act interpretation and consent exception)
• Boettger v. Loverro, 521 Pa. 366, 370-71, 555 A.2d 1234, 1236-37 (1989) (privacy protection and permissible interception)
• Easton Pub. Co. v. Boettger, 493 U.S. 885 (1989) (U.S. Supreme Court on wiretap principles (vacated/remand context))
• Commonwealth v. Taylor, Pa. Super. 181, 622 A.2d 329 (1993) (reasonable grounds standard for consensual surveillance)
• Commonwealth v. Phillips, Pa. Super. 193, 540 A.2d 933 (1988) (consent-based wiretap analysis framework)