In Re Grand Jury Subpoenas Dated December 10, 1987. Does I Through IV v. United States

Good Law
91 Daily Journal DAR 1973·926 F.2d 847·1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 2243·91 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 1168
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 15, 199188-15193, 88-15268 to 88-15270California5,706 words

Opinion

Opinion

Alarcon, J.

Doe Two, Doe Three, and Doe Four appeal from the district court’s partial denial of their motions to quash grand jury subpoenas and for the return of property seized, pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P. 41(e). We affirm.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY

On December 11, 1987, as part of a grand jury investigation into money laundering and drug trafficking, federal agents sought warrants to search two offices of the Doe Four law firm, a firm in the western part of the United States. The affidavit in support of the search warrants asserted the following facts.

In the summer of 1983, William Isted told Doe One that there were ways to launder money through foreign corporations. Thereafter, Doe One and Isted set up at least one corporation in the principality of Liechtenstein to launder drug money. Isted smuggled $100,000 out of the United States, which was put into the Liechtenstein corporation’s accounts. In April, 1985, Isted was arrested at the airport in Vancouver, Canada. He had in his possession $200,000 in cash and documents pertaining to the Liechtenstein corporation. These documents showed that Doe One was involved in the corporation. Isted’s luggage contained a letter directed to the…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.