MOTION FOR INQUIRY OF ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE

The Defendant, by and through the undersigned counsel, moves this Court for an Order requiring the government, through its Office of the United States Attorney, to make inquiry of all investigative agencies as to whether or not said agency was involved in investigation of this case and to ascertain whether or not any mechanical or other form of electronic surveillance was conducted at any time involving the Defendant or Defendant's premises, and to disclose to the Defendant and Defendant's legal counsel the nature and extent of said surveillance and to turn over to counsel any surveillance records.

WHEREFORE, the Defendant respectfully moves this Court to require the government to inquire of the various federal and Florida investigative agencies to determine if the Defendant or the Defendant's premises were the subject of any electronic eavesdropping and if so, to advise legal counsel of the date, time and place and the nature thereof, and to provide counsel with copies of any surveillance records.

MEMORANDUM OF LAW

The Defendant asserts that pursuant to the Fourth and Fifth Amendments of the United States Constitution, Defendant has the right to such information so as to permit the Defendant to make further inquiry as to the intent and legality of such electronic surveillance.

In United States v. Leichtfuss 331 F.Supp. 723, 736 (N.D. Ill. 1971), the Court stated that:

Accordingly, the government is ordered to inquire of the various federal investigative agencies as to whether any of these defendants were the subject of electronic eavesdropping. This order extends to conversations of defendants' counsel if the over-heard conversations were with a defendant or related to his case. If such inquiry should reveal that any defendant was the subject of such eavesdropping, he shall be so advised before trial. At that time the court will determine the legal issues as to the "legality" of the electronic surveillance and the defendant's standing to challenge that legality.

See also Alderman v. United States, 394 U.S. 165, 182, 89 S.Ct. 961, 971, 22 L.Ed.2d 176 (1969) (requiring production of any surveillance records to counsel).

DATED this day of October, 1995.

C:\wwwfpd\electro2.htm