In re the United States

431 F. Supp. 2d 544
CourtDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania
DecidedMay 23, 2006
DocketMisc. No. 00-2006-03
StatusPublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 431 F. Supp. 2d 544 (In re the United States) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, E.D. Pennsylvania primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
In re the United States, 431 F. Supp. 2d 544 (E.D. Pa. 2006).

Opinion

[545]*545 FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW IN CONNECTION WITH THE APPLICATION FOR THE RELEASE OF INFORMATION

EDUARDO C. ROBRENO, District Judge.

The United States of America has submitted this application for an order authorizing the limited disclosure of information, including the contents of intercepted wire communications, filed under seal in this Title III proceeding, for the limited purpose of assisting the Pennsylvania State Police (“PSP”) in the enforcement of the Pennsylvania Race Horse Development and Gaming Act, 4 Pa.C.S. §§ 1101, et seq., (the “Gaming Act”) on behalf of the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board.

Findings of Fact

1. In 2004, the Pennsylvania Legislature adopted the Gaming Act which provides for the establishment, on a limited basis, of legalized gambling in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania. The statute also provides for the creation of the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board to, among other things, oversee and administer the grant of licenses to engage in gambling operations in the Commonwealth.

2. The Gaming Act authorizes the Gaming Control Board to “require background investigations on prospective or existing licensees, permittees or persons holding a controlling interest in any prospective or existing licensee or permittee under the jurisdiction of the Board.” 4 Pa.C.S. § 1202(b)(1).

3. The Gaming Act provides that:

The [Gaming Control] Board shall not issue or renew a license or permit unless it is satisfied that the applicant is a person of good character, honesty and integrity, and is a person whose prior activities, criminal record, if any, reputation, habits and associations do not pose a threat to the public interest or the effective regulation and control of slot machine operations or create or enhance the danger of unsuitable, unfair or illegal practices, methods and activities in the conduct of slot machine operations or the carrying on of the business and financial arrangement incidental thereto.

4 Pa.C.S. § 1202(b)(15).

4. The Gaming Act provides for the creation of the Bureau of Investigation & Enforcement (“BIE”) to conduct background investigations of operator license applicants, manufacturer license applicants, and key employees of the applicants. The Gaming Act also authorizes the Gaming Control Board to contract with the PSP to conduct background investigations. As part of its background investigation process, the BIE also requests and obtains information from the PSP.

5. By correspondence dated May 1, 2006, the BIE advised the United States Attorney for the Eastern District of Pennsylvania that Mr. X has applied for a gaming license for himself and his company, Mt. Airy # 1, L.C.C. The BIE has requested that the United States Attorney’s Office “provide any information in its files which would adversely reflect on Mr. X’s 1 good character, honesty, and integrity and potentially preclude him from obtaining a gaming license in the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania.”

6. In support of its request, the BIE forwarded a copy of a “Release Authorization” executed by Mr. X in accordance with the Gaming Board regulations. The Release Authorization provides that Mr. X authorizes and requests that:

[E]very Federal, State or local government agency, including, but not limited [546]*546to, every court, law enforcement agency, criminal justice agency, or probation department, without exception, both foreign and domestic, to whom this release authorization is presented having information relating to or concerning [the applicant] to furnish such information to any duly appointed agent of the Pennsylvania Gaming Control Board whether or not such documents would otherwise be protected from disclosure by any constitutional, statutory, regulatory, or common law privilege.

The Release Authorization authorizes any law enforcement agency “to make full and complete disclosure of any and all information on file or available concerning the [applicant].” The Release Authorization further provides that Mr. X releases any claim or potential claim he may have against any law enforcement agency or court arising out the disclosure of information made in connection with the Release Authorization.

7. Before the BIE submitted its written request to the USAO, the PSP had advised the government that Mr. X had applied for a gaming license and requested information relating to Mr. X in connection with his background investigation.2

8. During the course of this Title III investigation of this case, the Court granted an original authorization order and twelve extension orders, authorizing government agents to intercept certain wire communications. In accordance with 18 U.S.C. § 2518(8)(b), the Court ordered that the applications, supporting affidavits, orders, progress reports, inventories and related documents be filed and maintained under seal. In accordance with 18 U.S.C. § 2518(8)(a), the Court ordered that the original digital recordings of intercepted wire communications be filed with the Clerk of the Court and maintained under seal.

9. Mr. X was named an Interceptee in the authorization orders entered by the Court in this Title III matter. The FBI has personally served Mr. X with an inventory, notifying him of the electronic monitoring conducted in this case.

Conclusions of Law

10. Title III provides for the disclosure and use of information relating to intercepted communications, including the contents of intercepted communications, for law enforcement purposes. See 18 U.S.C. § 2517. Pursuant to § 2517(1), any investigative or law enforcement officer is authorized to disclose the contents of intercepted wire communications to any other investigative or law enforcement officer “to the extent such use is appropriate to the proper performance of the official duties of the officer making or receiving the disclosure.” 18 U.S.C. § 2517(1). Pursuant to § 2517(2), any investigative or law enforcement officer is authorized to use the contents of intercepted wire communications “to the extent such use is appropriate to the proper performance of his official duties.” 18 U.S.C. § 2517(2). Pursuant to § 2517(3), any person may disclose the contents of intercepted wire communications, and any evidence derived from intercepted communications, “while giving testimony under oath or affirmation in any proceeding held under the authority of the United States or of any State or political subdivision thereof.” 18 U.S.C. § 2517(3). Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 2517(5), any investigative officer may use and disclose the contents of intercepted wire communications and evidence derived from intercept[547]

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

Related

In Re of US for an Order Author. Inter. of Wire
431 F. Supp. 2d 544 (E.D. Pennsylvania, 2006)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
431 F. Supp. 2d 544, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/in-re-the-united-states-paed-2006.