(1) Each application for an order authorizing the interception of a wire, oral or electronic communication shall be made in writing, upon oath or affirmation, to a judge of competent jurisdiction, and shall state the applicant's authority to make such application. Each application shall include the following information:
(a) The identity of the prosecuting attorney making the application, and the identity of the investigative or law enforcement officer requesting such application to be made;
(b) a full and complete statement of the facts and circumstances relied upon by the applicant to justify such applicant's belief that an order should be issued, including (i) details as to the particular offense that has been, is being or is about to be committed, (ii) except as provided in subsection (10), a particular description of the nature and location of the facilities from which or the place where the communication is to be intercepted, (iii) a particular description of the type of communications sought to be intercepted, and (iv) the identity of the person, if known, committing the offense and whose communications are to be intercepted;
(c) a full and complete statement as to whether or not other investigative procedures have been tried and failed or why they reasonably appear to be unlikely to succeed if tried or to be too dangerous;
(d) a statement of the period of time for which the interception is required to be maintained and, if the nature of the investigation is such that the authorization for interception should not automatically terminate when the described type of communication first has been obtained, a particular description of facts establishing probable cause to believe that additional communications of the same type will occur thereafter;
(e) a full and complete statement of the facts known to the applicant concerning all previous applications made to any judge for authorization to intercept wire, oral or electronic communications involving any of the same persons, facilities or places specified in the application, and the action taken by the judge on each such application; and
(f) where the application is for the extension of an order, a statement setting forth the results thus far obtained from the interception, or a reasonable explanation of the failure to obtain such results.
(2) The judge may require the applicant to furnish additional testimony or documentary evidence in support of the application. Oral testimony shall be under oath or affirmation, and a record of such testimony shall be made by a certified shorthand reporter and reduced to writing.
(3) Upon such application the judge may enter an ex parte order, as requested or as modified, authorizing the interception of wire, oral or electronic communications within the territorial jurisdiction of such judge, if the judge determines on the basis of the facts submitted by the applicant that:
(a) There is probable cause for belief that a person is committing, has committed or is about to commit a particular offense enumerated in subsection (1) of K.S.A. 22-2515, and amendments thereto;
(b) there is probable cause for belief that particular communications concerning the offense will be obtained through such interception;
(c) normal investigative procedures have been tried and have failed, or reasonably appear to be unlikely to succeed if tried, or to be too dangerous; and
(d) except as provided in subsection (10), there is probable cause for belief that the facilities from which, or the place where, the wire, oral or electronic communications are to be intercepted are being used, or are about to be used, in connection with the commission of such offense, or are leased to, listed in the name of or commonly used by such person.
(4) Each order authorizing the interception of any wire, oral or electronic communication shall:
(a) Specify the identity of the person, if known, whose communications are to be intercepted;
(b) specify the nature and location of the communications facilities as to which, or the place where, authority to intercept is granted;
(c) specify with particularity a description of the type of communication sought to be intercepted, and a statement of the particular offense to which it relates;
(d) specify the identity of each agency authorized to intercept the communications, and of the person authorizing the application;
(e) specify the period of time during which such interception is authorized, including a statement as to whether or not the interception shall automatically terminate when the described communication has been first obtained; and
(f) upon request of the applicant, direct that a provider of wire communication, electronic communication service, regardless of the location or principal place of business of such provider of electronic communication service, or public utility, landlord, custodian or other person shall furnish the applicant forthwith all information, facilities and technical assistance necessary to accomplish the interception unobtrusively and with a minimum of interference with the services that such service provider, utility, landlord, custodian or person is according the person whose communications are to be intercepted. Any provider of wire or electronic communication service or public utility, landlord, custodian or other person furnishing such facilities or technical assistance shall be compensated therefor by the applicant for reasonable expenses incurred in providing such facilities or technical assistance.
(5) No order entered under this section may authorize the interception of any wire, oral or electronic communication for any period longer than is necessary to achieve the objective of the authorization, nor in any event longer than 30 days. Such thirty-day period begins on the earlier of the day on which the investigative or law enforcement officer first begins to conduct an interception under the order or 10 days after the order is entered. Extensions of an order may be granted, but only upon application for an extension made in accordance with subsection (1) of this section and the court making the findings required by subsection (3) of this section. The period of any such extension shall be no longer than the authorizing judge deems necessary to achieve the purposes for which it was granted and in no event for longer than 30 days. Every order and extension thereof shall contain a provision that the authorization to intercept shall be executed as soon as practicable, shall be conducted in such a way as to minimize the interception of communications not otherwise subject to interception under this act, and must terminate upon attainment of the authorized objective, or in any event in 30 days. In the event the intercepted communication is in a code or foreign language, and an expert in that foreign language or code is not reasonably available during the interception period, minimization may be accomplished as soon as practicable after such interception. An interception under this chapter may be conducted in whole or in part by government personnel, or by an individual operating under a contract with the government, acting under the supervision of an investigative or law enforcement officer authorized to conduct the interception.
(6) Whenever an order authorizing the interception of wire or oral communications is entered pursuant to this act, the order may require reports to be made to the judge who issued the order showing what progress has been made toward achievement of the authorized objective and the need for continued interception. Such reports shall be made at such intervals as the judge may require.
(7) (a) The contents of any wire, oral or electronic communication intercepted by any means authorized by this act shall be recorded, if possible, on tape or wire or other comparable device. The recording of the contents of any wire, oral or electronic communication under this subsection shall be done in a manner which will protect the recording from editing or other alterations. Immediately upon the expiration of the period of the order, or extensions thereof, such recordings shall be made available to the judge issuing such order and sealed under such judge's directions. Custody of the recordings shall be wherever the judge orders, and the recordings shall not be destroyed except upon order of the issuing or denying judge and, in any event, shall be kept for not less than 10 years. Duplicate recordings may be made for use or disclosure pursuant to the provisions of subsections (b) and (c) of K.S.A. 22-2515, and amendments thereto, for investigations. The presence of the seal provided for by this subsection, or a satisfactory explanation for the absence thereof, shall be a prerequisite for the use or disclosure of the contents of any wire, oral or electronic communication or evidence derived therefrom under subsection (d) of K.S.A. 22-2515, and amendments thereto.
(b) Applications made and orders granted under this act shall be sealed by the judge. Custody of the applications and orders shall be wherever the judge directs. Such applications and orders shall be disclosed only upon a showing of good cause before a judge of competent jurisdiction and shall not be destroyed except on order of the issuing or denying judge, and in any event shall be kept for not less than 10 years.
(c) Any violation of the provisions of paragraph (a) or (b) of this subsection may be punished as contempt of the issuing or denying judge.
(d) Within a reasonable time but not later than 90 days after the termination of the period of an order or extensions thereof the issuing or denying judge shall cause to be served on the persons named in the order or the application and, in the interest of justice, such other parties to intercepted communications as the judge may determine, an inventory which shall include notice of:
(i) The fact of the entry of the order or the application;
(ii) the date of the entry and the period of authorized, approved or disapproved interception, or the denial of the application; and
(iii) the fact that during the period wire, oral or electronic communications were or were not intercepted.
The judge, upon the filing of a motion in such judge's discretion, may make available to such person or such person's counsel for inspection, such portions of the intercepted communications, applications and orders as the judge determines to be in the interest of justice. On an ex parte showing of good cause to a judge of competent jurisdiction the serving of the inventory required by this subsection may be postponed.
(8) The contents of any intercepted wire, oral or electronic communication or evidence derived therefrom shall not be received in evidence or otherwise disclosed in any trial, hearing or other proceeding in any federal court or court of this state, unless each party, not less than 10 days before the trial, hearing or proceeding, has been furnished with a copy of the court order, and accompanying application, under which the interception was authorized. Such ten-day period may be waived by the judge, if the judge finds that it was not possible to furnish the party with the above information 10 days before the trial, hearing or proceeding, and that the party will not be prejudiced by the delay in receiving such information.
(9) (a) Any aggrieved person in any trial, hearing or proceeding in or before any court, department, officer, agency, regulatory body or other authority of the United States, this state, or a political subdivision thereof, may move to suppress the contents of any intercepted wire or oral communication, or evidence derived therefrom, on the grounds that:
(i) The communication was unlawfully intercepted;
(ii) the order of authorization under which it was intercepted is insufficient on its face; or
(iii) the interception was not made in conformity with the order of authorization.
Such motion shall be made before the trial, hearing or proceeding, unless there was no opportunity to make such motion or the person was not aware of the grounds of the motion. If the motion is granted, the contents of the intercepted wire or oral communication, or evidence derived therefrom, shall be treated as having been obtained in violation of this act. Upon the filing of such motion by the aggrieved person, the judge in such judge's discretion may make available to the aggrieved person or such person's counsel for inspection such portions of the intercepted communication or evidence derived therefrom as the judge determines to be in the interest of justice.
(b) In addition to any other right to appeal, the state shall have the right to appeal:
(i) From an order granting a motion to suppress made under paragraph (a) of this subsection. Such appeal shall be taken within 14 days after the order of suppression was entered and shall be diligently prosecuted as in the case of other interlocutory appeals or under such rules as the supreme court may adopt;
(ii) from an order denying an application for an order authorizing the interception of wire or oral communications, and any such appeal shall be ex parte and shall be in camera in preference to all other pending appeals in accordance with rules promulgated by the supreme court.
(10) The requirements of subsections (1)(b)(ii) and (3)(d) of this section relating to the specification of the facilities from which, or the place where, the communication is to be intercepted do not apply if:
(a) In the case of an application with respect to the interception of an oral communication:
(i) The application is by a law enforcement officer and is approved by the attorney general and the county or district attorney where the application is sought;
(ii) the application contains a full and complete statement as to why such specification is not practical and identifies the person committing the offense and whose communications are to be intercepted; and
(iii) the judge finds that such specification is not practical; and
(b) in the case of an application with respect to a wire or electronic communication:
(i) The application is by a law enforcement officer and is approved by the attorney general and the county or district attorney where the application is sought;
(ii) the application identifies the person believed to be committing the offense and whose communications are to be intercepted and the applicant makes a showing of a purpose, on the part of that person, to thwart interception by changing facilities; and
(iii) the judge finds that such purpose has been adequately shown.
(11) An interception of a communication under an order with respect to which the requirements of subsections (1)(b)(ii) and (3)(d) of this section do not apply by reason of subsection (10) shall not begin until the facilities from which, or the place where, the communication is to be intercepted is ascertained by the person implementing the interception order. A provider of wire or electronic communications service that has received an order as provided for in subsection (10)(b) may move the court to modify or quash the order on the ground that its assistance with respect to the interception cannot be performed in a timely or reasonable fashion. The court, upon notice to the government, shall decide such a motion expeditiously.
(12) The remedies and sanctions described in this chapter with respect to the interception of electronic communications are the only judicial remedies and sanctions for nonconstitutional violations of this act involving such communications.
(13) Nothing in this section shall be construed as requiring a search warrant for cellular location information in an emergency situation pursuant to K.S.A. 22-4615, and amendments thereto.