Tex. Code of Criminal Procedure § 18A.151
This is the official text of Tex. Code of Criminal Procedure § 18A.151, 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.151. REQUIREMENTS REGARDING INTERCEPTION ORDER FOR COMMUNICATION BY SPECIFIED PERSON.
Official statutory text
The requirements of Articles 18A.055(b)(3)(B) and 18A.103(a)(2) relating to the specification of the facilities from which or the place where a communication is to be intercepted do not apply if:
(1) in the case of an application for an interception order that authorizes the interception of an oral communication:
(A) the application contains a complete statement as to why the specification is not practical and identifies the person committing or believed to be committing the offense and whose communications are to be intercepted; and
(B) a judge of competent jurisdiction finds that the specification is not practical; or
(2) in the case of an application for an interception order that authorizes the interception of a wire or electronic communication:
(A) the application identifies the person committing or believed to be committing the offense and whose communications are to be intercepted;
(B) a judge of competent jurisdiction finds that the prosecutor has made an adequate showing of probable cause to believe that the actions of the person identified in the application could have the effect of preventing interception from a specified facility; and
(C) the authority to intercept a wire or electronic communication under the interception order is limited to a period in which it is reasonable to presume that the person identified in the application will be reasonably proximate to the interception device.
(1) in the case of an application for an interception order that authorizes the interception of an oral communication:
(A) the application contains a complete statement as to why the specification is not practical and identifies the person committing or believed to be committing the offense and whose communications are to be intercepted; and
(B) a judge of competent jurisdiction finds that the specification is not practical; or
(2) in the case of an application for an interception order that authorizes the interception of a wire or electronic communication:
(A) the application identifies the person committing or believed to be committing the offense and whose communications are to be intercepted;
(B) a judge of competent jurisdiction finds that the prosecutor has made an adequate showing of probable cause to believe that the actions of the person identified in the application could have the effect of preventing interception from a specified facility; and
(C) the authority to intercept a wire or electronic communication under the interception order is limited to a period in which it is reasonable to presume that the person identified in the application will be reasonably proximate to the interception device.
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.