Delaware § 2008 Exception for safety of individual or protection of identity

Delaware Statutes

§ 2008 — Exception for safety of individual or protection of identity

Delaware § 2008

JurisdictionDelaware

Title11

PartCriminal Procedure Generally

Ch. 20Custodial Interrogations

Subch.Uniform Electronic Recordation of Custodial Interrogations Act

This text of Delaware § 2008 (Exception for safety of individual or protection of identity) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Delaware primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Del. Code tit. 11, § 2008 (2026).

Text

A custodial interrogation to which § 2003 of this title otherwise applies need not be recorded electronically if a law-enforcement officer conducting the interrogation or the officer’s superior reasonably believes that electronic recording would disclose the identity of a confidential informant or jeopardize the safety of an officer, the individual being interrogated, or another individual. If feasible and consistent with the safety of a confidential informant, an explanation of the basis for the belief that electronic recording would disclose the informant’s identity must be in writing at the time of the interrogation. If contemporaneous memorialization of the basis for the belief is not feasible, the memorialization must be made as soon as practicable after the interrogation is completed

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

A custodial interrogation to which § 2003 of this title otherwise applies need not be recorded electronically if a law-enforcement officer conducting the interrogation or the officer’s superior reasonably believes that electronic recording would disclose the identity of a confidential informant or jeopardize the safety of an officer, the individual being interrogated, or another individual. If feasible and consistent with the safety of a confidential informant, an explanation of the basis for the belief that electronic recording would disclose the informant’s identity must be in writing at the time of the interrogation. If contemporaneous memorialization of the basis for the belief is not feasible, the memorialization must be made as soon as practicable after the interrogation is completed.