Tex. Code of Criminal Procedure § 18A.102
This is the official text of Tex. Code of Criminal Procedure § 18A.102, part of Texas’s Code of Criminal Procedure — sets the procedural rules for criminal cases in Texas.
Not legal advice. This page reproduces the official text of a government statute for reference only. Laws change, and how a statute applies depends on your specific facts. For advice about your situation, consult a licensed attorney in your state.
§ 18A.102. JUDICIAL DETERMINATIONS REQUIRED FOR ISSUANCE OF INTERCEPTION ORDER.
Official statutory text
On receipt of an application under Subchapter B, the judge may issue an ex parte interception order, as requested or as modified, if the judge determines from the evidence submitted by the prosecutor that:
(1) there is probable cause to believe that a person is committing, has committed, or is about to commit a particular offense described by Article 18A.101;
(2) there is probable cause to believe that particular communications concerning that offense will be obtained through the interception;
(3) normal investigative procedures have been attempted and have failed or reasonably appear to be unlikely to succeed or to be too dangerous if attempted;
(4) there is probable cause to believe that the facilities from which or the place where the wire, oral, or electronic communications are to be intercepted is being used or is about to be used in connection with the commission of an offense or is leased to, listed in the name of, or commonly used by the person; and
(5) a covert entry is or is not necessary to properly and safely install the wiretapping, electronic surveillance, or eavesdropping equipment.
(1) there is probable cause to believe that a person is committing, has committed, or is about to commit a particular offense described by Article 18A.101;
(2) there is probable cause to believe that particular communications concerning that offense will be obtained through the interception;
(3) normal investigative procedures have been attempted and have failed or reasonably appear to be unlikely to succeed or to be too dangerous if attempted;
(4) there is probable cause to believe that the facilities from which or the place where the wire, oral, or electronic communications are to be intercepted is being used or is about to be used in connection with the commission of an offense or is leased to, listed in the name of, or commonly used by the person; and
(5) a covert entry is or is not necessary to properly and safely install the wiretapping, electronic surveillance, or eavesdropping equipment.
Status: in_force · Read it on the official government site
Dealing with a criminal defense matter in Texas?
See all Texas Criminal Defense lawyers
About this page: Statute text is reproduced from official government publishers via the
Open US Law dataset
(Vaquill AI, snapshot v2026.08, CC BY 4.0). Primary legislative text like this is public domain under the government-edicts doctrine
(Georgia v. Public.Resource.Org, 2020). We link every section back to its official source so you can verify it independently.