EFTA00188312

Page 2 of 8 
QUERY - ((TRACKER "TRACKING 
DEVICE") /P AIRPLANE) & "FOURTH 
AMENDMENT' 
DATABASES(S) - CTA 
4. I  
U.S. I. Amuny, 767 F.2d 1113, C.A.5 (Tex.), July 29, 1985(No. 84-2376.84-2376) 
...of plane; and (9) government agent's conduct in climbing plane and peering in windshield 
constituted unreasonable search within meaning of Fourth Amendment. Affirmed in part, reversed 
in part and remanded. Robert Madden Hill, Circuit Judge, filed special concurring opinion. West 
Headnotes [I ... 
...for Stop or Investigation 35 63 5(4) k. Reasonableness; Reasonable or Founded Suspicion, Etc. 
Law enforcement officers may, consistent with Fourth Amendment, stop person and detain him 
briefly for routine questioning when they have reasonable suspicion to believe that person may be ... 
...Effect of Illegal Conduct; Trespass 349 80 1 k. In General. (Formerly 349k80 349k7(10) 
Although trespass does not always result in Fourth Amendment violation, government's trespass is 
usuall unreasonable and violative of legitimate expectation of privacy. U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 4 
n 8] 
8 Aviation 48B1... 
P' 
U
5.
S. . Little, 735 F.2d 1049„ C.A.8 (Ark.), May 22, 1984(Nos. 82-1591, 82-1592, 
82-1 
i
3.82-159182-159282-1593) 
...k. Reliability or Credibility; Corroboration. (Formerly 372k5I5 372 Telecommunications 372X 
Interception or Disclosure of Electronic Communications; Electronic Surveillance 372X(C) 
Tracking Devices 372 1487 k. Warrants or Judicial Authorization. (Formerly 372k541 Search 
warrant affidavit was insufficient and magistrate's order authorizing installation of transponder in 
airplane was therefore invalid where affidavit recited bits of information attributed to "confidential 
informants" but afliant did not add the conclusory ... 
...States Magistrate in Memphis, Tennessee, an order allowing him to install a transponder on the 
plane. A transponder is a tracking device, also called a beeper. Before the beeper was installed, 
a government agent approached Scott Whitney, a service administrator of Memphis ... 
...the hangar. Later that day, the transponder was installed on the plane. The operation involved 
detaching a panel inside the airplane, secreting the beeper behind it, and then replacing the panel. 
On June 8, 1981, Harmon, Sager, and Fulbright left for... 
O 2007 Thomson/West. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works. 
......
Instre.nintnrint/nrintgtresim.asnx7sv=Full&orft=HTMLE&In= 
tov&rs=... 
12/27/2007 
EFTA00188472

Page 3 of 8 
QUERY - ((TRACKER "TRACKING 
DEVICE") /P AIRPLANE) & "FOURTH 
AMENDMENT 
DATABASES(S) - CfA 
6. H U.S.'. Buns, 729 F.2d 1514„ C.A.5 (Tex.), April 23, 1984(No. 82.1260.82-1260) 
...customs officials of signal that disclosed presence of aircraft in public airspace was not 
unconstitutional search or seizure under the Fourth Amendment because terms of warrant 
authorizing signalling device required it to be removed before its signal was recorded. Reversed and 
...officials' monitoring of signal that disclosed presence of aircraft in public airspace was not 
unconstitutional search or seizure under the Fourth Amendment because terms of warrant 
authorizing signalling device required it to be removed before its signal was recorded. U.S.C.A. 
Const.Amend. 4 [2] 372 Telecommunications 372X Interception or Disclosure of Electronic 
Communications; Electronic Surveillance 372X(C) Tracking Devices 372 1486 k. Transponders 
or "Beepers" in General; Warrantless Proceedings. (Formerly 372k540 349k7(10) Monitoring 
signals from electronic tracking device that tells officers no more than that specific aircraft is 
flying in public airspace does not violate any reasonable expectation of privacy and thus no Fourth 
Amendment violation results from public detection; movement of airplane in sky, like that of 
automobile on highway, is not something in which person can claim reasonable expectation of 
privacy ... 
...General. Purpose of exclusionary rule is to deter improper police conduct that violates person's 
reasonable expectation of privacy under the Fourth Amendment, and rule does not purport to 
reach all illegal conduct by officers. U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 4 [4] 372 Telecommunications 372X 
Intergeption... 
7. 
1> 
U.S.I. Butts, 710 F.2d 1139„ C.A.5 (Tex.), August 01, 1983(No. 82-1260.82-1260) 
...Circuit Judge, held that: (1) physical attachment of electronic " 
' to interior of aircraft 
constituted a "search" within meaning of Fourth Amendment, and 2) where beeper installed 
inside aircraft pursuant to valid search warrant remained present in aircraft after expiration of court 
...of electronic tracking device in the interior of a vehicle or conveyance is a "search" within the 
meaning of the Fourth Amendment. U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 4 (2] 349 Searches and Seizures 
3491 In General 349 13 What Constitutes Search or Seizure 349 21 ... 
...Devices or "Beepers.". (Formerly 349k1 Physical attachment of electronic "beeper" to interior of 
aircraft constituted a "search" within meaning of Fourth Amendment. U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 4 
[31 372 Telecommunications 372X Interception or Disclosure of Electronic Communications; 
Elec
c Surveillance 372X(B) Authorization by Courts... 
8. F" 
U.S.I.g Stewart, 700 F.2d 702„ CA.11 (Fla.), March 18, 1983(No. 81-607081-6070) 
...L.Ed.2d 408 (1965) (deliberate choice by counsel to delay objeglion to tainted evidence may 
waive defendant's rights under the fourth amendment); Winters,. Cook, 489 F.2d 174 (5th 
Cir.1973) (intentional strategic waiver by counsel of defendant's nght to object ... 
...Appellants attempted to prove that the detection of their aircraft was made possible by an 
electronic device attached to their airplane as part of an ongoing investigation by the Customs 
Department. This was rejected by the district court as without merit ... 
...presented absolutely no evidence supporting their allegations that their apprehension was due to 
the use of an illegally placed electronic tracking device, that the Coast Guard had probable cause 
to arrest in time to obtain a warrant or that they were forced... 
O 2007 Thomson/West. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works. 
mamba... rnminrint/nrintstresmasnx?sv=Full&vrft=141'MLE&fn= totArs=... 
12/27/2007 
EFTA00188473

Page 4 of 8 
QUERY - ((TRACKER "TRACKING 
DEVICE") /P AIRPLANE) & "FOURTH 
AMENDMENT" 
DATABASES(S) - CTA 
9. P' 
U.S. I Parks, 684 F.2d 1078„ C.A.5 (Tex.), August 20, 1982(No. 79-5497.79-5497) 
...to distribute, and they appealed. The Court of Appeals, Garwood, Circuit Judge, held that 
defendants failed to establish that their Fourth Amendment rights were violated by installation, 
maintenance or monitoring of electronic transponder inside airplane. Affirmed. West Headnotes [I] 
349 Searches and ... 
...only plane and he was never on it, installation, maintenance and monitoring of beeper invaded no 
interest of defendant that Fourth Amendment was designed to protect. 11.S.C.A.ConstAmend. 4 
[3] 349 Searches and Seizures 3491V Standing to Object 349 164 lc. Particular Concrete ... 
...marihuana to landing site, prior entry into plane by government agents and installation of 
electronic transponder did not infringe defendant's Fourth Amendment rights. 
U.S.C.A.Const.Amend. 4 [4] 349 Searches and Seizures 3491V Standing to Object 349 164 k. 
Particular Concrete Applications. (Formerly 349k7(26)... 
10. C 
U.S. I Long, 674 F.2d 848, 10 Fed. R. Evid. Serv. 438„ C.A.11 (Ala.), April 30, 1982(No. 
81-7290.81-7290) 
...the transponder in defendant's airplane and monitoring of the device for 90 days, was reasonable 
and did not violate the Fourth Amendment; (2) magistrate's finding that probable cause existed to 
issue the order authorizing installation of the transponder in defendant's airplane was ... 
...assistance of counsel. Affirmed. West Headnotes [1) 372 Telecommunications 372X 
Interception or Disclosure of Electronic Communications; Electronic Surveillance 372X(C) 
Tracking Devices 372 1487 k. Warrants or Judicial Authorization. (Formerly 3721c54I 349k7(10) 
Operating transponder for one week under court order, which authorized installation of the 
transponder in defendant's airplane and monitoring of the device for 90 days, was reasonable and 
not in violation of the Fourth Amendment. U.S.C.A.Const.Amend. 4 [4 349 Searches and 
Seizures 349VI Judicial Review or Determination 349 200 k. Scope of Inquiry or Review ... 
...Object 349 162 k. Privacy Interest or Expectation, in General. (Formerly 349k7(26) A person 
can claim the protection of the Fourth Amendment only if he can show some legitimate 
ex 
lion of privacy in the area or object searched. U.S.C.A.Const.Amend. 4 [ 114... 
11. C 
U. s. I Dickerson, 655 F.2d 559, C.A.4 (Va.), July 30, 1981(No. 80-5210.80-52 0) 
...arose that defendant did not have a legitimate expectation of privacy in the aircraft to entitle him 
to raise a Fourth Amendment objection to its search. Affirmed. West Headnotes [1] 349 Searches 
and Seizures 349VI Judicial Review or Determination 349 192 Presumptions ... 
...proof was on defendant to establish a legitimate expectation of privacy in aircraft that would 
entitle him to raise a Fourth Amendment objection to its search. U.S.CA.Const. Amend. 4 [2] 
349 Searches and Seizures 3491V Standing to Object 349 161 k. In General. (Formerly 
hi
349k7(26) Only an owner of roperty may raise a Fourth Amendment objection to its search. 
U.S.C.A.Const. Amend. 4 [3 349 Searches and Seizures 349IV Standing to Object 349 161 k. In 
General. (Formerly 3491(7(2 A person who is unlawfully in possession of an aircraft has no right 
to raise a Fourth Amendment objection to its search. U.S.C.A.Const. Amend. 4 [4] 349 Searches 
and Seizures 349IV Standing to Object 349 164 k Particular ... 
...arose that defendant did not have a legitimate expectation of privacy in the aircraft to entitle him 
to raise a Fourth Amendment objection to its search. U.S.C.A.Const. Amend. 4 [5] 410 
Witnesses 410111 Examination 41011I(D) Privilege of Witness 410 299 Privilege... 
02007 Thomson/West. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works. 
• 
• 
•I 
. - 
actiV9Cv=F1111knrfST
-TTMT .F.Rifn= tnnkss= 
12/27/2007 
EFTA00188474

Page 5 of 
QUERY - ((TRACKER "TRACKING 
DEVICE") /P AIRPLANE) & "FOURTH 
AMENDMENT 
DATABASES(S) - CTA 
12. N 
U.S. A Chavez, 603 F.2d I43„ C.A.10 (N.M.), August 02, 1979(Nos. 78-1128, 
78-1 9.78-112978-1128) 
...k. In General. (Formerly 372k514.1 372k514 349k3.6(1) 372 Telecommunications 372X 
Interception or Disclosure of Electronic Communications; Electronic Surveillance 372X(C) 
Tracking Devices 372 1487 k. Warrants or Judicial Authorization. (Formerly 372k541 
349k3.6(1) Court orders, authorizing the use of a beeper for surveillance ... 
...officer or an attorney for the government"; and the fact that the federal authorities participated in 
the tracking of the airplanes did not affect the validity of the state court orders previously issued. 
[4] 110 Criminal Law 110XVII Evidence 110XVII(1... 
...trial the defendants filed a motion to suppress on the ground that the installation and use of the 
beeper violated Fourth Amendment rights. After an evidentiary hearing, the trial court denied the 
mot
 to suppress. This ruling is the only matter urged.. 
13. 
H 
U.S. I Nelson, 593 F.2d 543, C.A.3 (Pa.), March 08, 1979(No. 78-1587.78-1587) 
...of this appeal is whether six tons of marijuana seized at the Mount Pocono Airport in 
Pennsylvania from a private airplane should have been suppressed as evidence. Appellant 
contends that the evidence was illegally seized because United States Customs Service agents, 
acting without a warrant, installed in the plane a locational tracking device called a "transponder," 
which they used to monitor the plane's route. While the district court held the use of the ... 
...11 [2] For purposes of this appeal, the court will assume, without deciding, that appellant has 
standing to raise these fourth amendment claims. [FN I] It is well settled that the taint on 
evidence obtained as a result of an illegal search and ... 
...SS L.Ed.2d 118 (1978) Even assuming, without deciding, that the installation and/or monitoring 
of the airplane violated appellants fourth amendment rights, the marijuana to which appellant 
l
obje 
was seized by the use of information " 'sufficiently distinguishable to be purged of... 
14. 
U.S.
P
 
&mean, 594 F.2d 1190, 57 A.L.R. Fed. 632,  C.A.8 (Minn.), March Dl, 1979(Nos. 
78-1 6, 78-1550.78-155078-1526) 
...transponder, commonly known as a beeper device, to track an aircraft in public airspace did not 
constitute a "search" within Fourth Amendment; (2) even if Government had a duty to disclose 
informants' identity to defendant prior to trial, defendant was not materially ... 
...papers. U.S.C.A.Const. Amend. 4 [2] 961i Controlled Substances 96H1V Searches and Seizures 
96111V(B) Search Without Warrant 9614 118 k. Airplanes and Airports. (Formerly 138k183.5 
138k182 Drugs and Narcotics) 372 Telecommunications 372X Interception or Disclosure of 
Electronic Communications; Electronic Surveillance 372X(C) Tracking Devices 372 1486 k. 
Transponders or "Beepers" in General; Warrantless Proceedings. (Formerly 372k540 349k7(10) 
Although the installation or attachment of a beeper device to airplane could potentially violate 
Fourth Amendment, no Fourth Amendment rights were violated by installation by Drug 
Enforcement Agency agents who had installed the transponder, commonly known as a beeper ... 
...Searches and Seizures 3491 In General 349 13 What Constitutes Search or Seizure 349 21 k. 
Use of Electronic Devices; Tracking Devices or "Beepers.". (Formerly 3491O(10) No one flying 
an airplane can reasonably expect that he has a right to keep his flying, landing, or takeoff location 
private, and thus the... 
O 2007 Thomson/West. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works. 
• 
a 
nenv7CILF111112rnr11=HTMT.P.Riln. 
tetn&.rs=... 
12/27/2007 
EFTA00188475

Page 6 of 8 
QUERY - ((TRACKER "TRACKING 
DEVICE") /P AIRPLANE) & "FOURTH 
AMENDMENT" 
DATABASES(S) - CTA 
15. 
I> 
U.S. iClaybome, 584 F.2d 346„ C.A.10 (Colo.), August 22, 1978(Nos. 77-1568, 
77-15770.77-156877.1570) 
...of ether, which resulted in location of laboratory where controlled substance was produced, was 
not per se violation of the Fourth Amendment, and (2) where trial court continued with trial in one 
defendant's absence, but upon discovery that absence was involuntary, mistrial... 
...based on warrantless use of device. (2] 372 Telecommunications 372X Interception or 
Disclosure of Electronic Communications; Electronic Surveillance 372X(C) Tracking Devices 
372 1486 k. Transponders or "Beepers" in General; Warrantless Proceedings. (Formerly 372k540 
349k7(10) Where agents, who lost contact with electronic tracking device that had been attached 
to container of ether after its movement from one defendant's house, had to use airplane to pick up 
beeper signal and locate clandestine laboratory, which was located in commercial building with 
windows covered to protect ... 
...against viewing of materials inside, slight intrusion resulting from use of device was not per se in 
violation of the Fourth Amendment and its warrantless use by agents was therefore not invalid. 
u.s.cA.Const. Amend. 4 [3) 13514 Double Jeopardy 135141V Effect of... 
16. P 
U.S. I Dubrofsky, 581 F.2d 208, C.A.9 (Cal.), August 09, 1978(No. 77-3738.77-3738) 
...device emanating beeping signals allowing tracing of package and emanating different beeping 
'signals if package was opened did not violate Fourth Amendment; (2) permanent resident of house 
had authority to consent to starch of basement of house; (3) special agent's affidavit was ... 
...package of electronic surveillance device after heroin had been discovered in package during 
lawful customs search did not violate any Fourth Amendment right. U.S.C.A.Const. Amend. 4 
[5] 9611 Controlled Substances 96HIV Searches and Seizures 961-IV(B) Search Without Warrant 
9611 107 Carriers ... 
...signals allowing package to be traced and changing beeping tones if package was opened, which 
device was attached without violating Fourth Amendment, did not sufficiently resemble wiretap so 
as to require antecedent justification that warrant would provide and thus did not violate Fourth 
Amendment. U.S.C.A.Const. Amend. 4 [6] 110 Criminal Law 110MCIV Review 110XXIV(O) 
QuestLons of Fact and Findings 110 1158 In General... 
17. P 
U.S. I Miroyan, 577 F.2d 489, C.A.9 (Cal.), May 01, 1978(Nos. 77-1125 and 
77-1367.77-112577-1367) 
...transponder merely to monitor the location of aircraft as it passed through public airspace was not 
a "search" subject to Fourth Amendment strictures, (2) installation of transponder, performed with 
consent of aircraft owner and while the plane was within his dominion, did not violate the Fourth 
Amendment rights of defendants, who flew the rented aircraft to Mexico, (3) officer who effected 
arrest of defendant in motel had ... 
...transponder merely to monitor the location of aircraft as it passed through public airspace was not 
a "search" subject to Fourth Amendment strictures. U.S.C.A.Const. Amend. 4 [2] 372 
Telecommunications 372X Interception or Disclosure of Electronic Communications; Electronic 
Surveillance 372X(C) Tracking Devices ... 
...of transponder, performed with consent of aircraft owner and while the plane was within his 
dominion, did not violate the Fourth Amendment rights of defendants, who flew the rented aircraft 
to Mexico. U.S.C.A.Const. Amend. 4 [3] 35 Arrest 3MI On Criminal Charges... 
02007 Thomson/West. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works. 
' 
• 
•- • - 1--,.••••••• 
nat. Iv I es-P. 11 I R. nrft=14TNA I 
Rr 
t 
1 111711f1111 
EFTA00188476

Page 7 of 8 
QUERY - ((TRACKER "TRACKING 
DEVICE") /P AIRPLANE) & "FOURTH 
AMENDMENT" 
DATABASES(S) - CTA 
18. P 
U.S.,. Cheshire, 569 F.2d 887, C.A.5 (Tex.), March 16, 1978(No. 77-5313.77-5313) 
...beeper without a warrant. Affirmed. West Hcadnotes 372 Telecommunications 372X 
Interception or Disclosure of Electronic Communications; Electronic Surveillance 372X(C) 
Tracking Devices 372 1486 k. Transponders or "Beepers" in General; Warrantless Proceedings. 
(Formerly 372k540 349k7(27) Assuming that use of electronic beeper to follow path of airplane 
rented and flown by defendant was a search, consent of the owners of the plane came within 
third-party consent ... 
...follow the path of an airplane flown by appellant was a search, and that the search was invalid 
undcr the fourth amendment because of the failure to obtain a warrant before placing the beeper 
on the airplane; (2) consent by the plane's ... 
...the lessee consented to the attachment of the beeper. Appellant first contends that the use of the 
beeper constituted a fourth amendment search. This issue ha 
of been conclusively resolved in 
this 
( 
Wrcuit, having been previously addressed in United States) Holmes... 
P
19.
U.S. . Curtis, 562 F.2d 1153,  C.A.9 (Ariz.), October 12, 197 
os. 77-2070, 77-2071, 77-2235 
and 
-2107.77-207077-207177-210777-2235) 
...of Appeals, Ely, Circuit Judge, held that where officers had been given reliable information, based 
on articulable facts, that an airplane was being utilized in pursuit of criminal activity by a specific, 
identifiable individual, who had made arrangements to rent the plane, it was proper for the owner to 
arrange for installation, by customs officials, of a transponder, an electric tracking device, 
although, in the ordinary case, secret surveillance devices in vehicles should be installed pursuant to 
court order under such reasonable ... 
...3] 114 Customs Duties 114XV Violations of Customs Laws 114 126 Searches and Seizures 114 
126(7) k. Airports and Airplanes. (Formerly 114k126 Where officers had been given reliable 
information, based on articulable facts, that airplane was being utilized in pursuit of criminal 
activity by specific, identifiable individual, who had made arrangements to rent thc plane, it was 
proper for owner to arrange for installation, by customs officials, of transponder, an electric 
tracking device, although, in ordinary case, secret surveillance devices in vehicles should be 
installed pursuant to court order under such reasonable time ... 
...Navajo aircraft, and the introduction of evidence derived from the use of the transponder, 
constituted an infringement of the appellants' Fourth Amendment rights. (2) That arresting officers 
did not have probable cause to stop and search a vehicle being driven by the... 
ID 2007 Thomson/West. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works. 
. . . 
n fry" PlA/V1 
EFTA00188477

Page 8 of 8 
QUERY - ((TRACKER "TRACKING 
DEVICE") /P AIRPLANE) & "FOURTH 
AMENDMENT" 
DATABASES(S) - CTA 
20. P 
U.S. 1,1 Worthington, 544 F.2d 1275„ C.A.5 (Tex.), January 10, 1977(No. 76-1586.76-1586) 
...that it contained boxes marked "Cessna Aircraft Parts" in place of the rear seats. He and Agent 
Morrison kept the airplane under surveillance and were soon joined by two Customs agents. In the 
early morning hours of April 28, 1974, an electronic tracking device ("beeper") was placed on 
Worthington's aircraft by the Customs agents to assist in the surveillance. Later that morning the 
agents ... 
...any evidence derived from the arrest and the ensuing search should have been suppressed as 
seized in violation of his Fourth Amendment rights. He places the time of arrest at the moment 
the Customs plane was taxied in front of appellant's aircraft... 
...in their restriction of personal autonomy to permit the extraordinary measure of departing from 
the probable cause requirement of the fourth amendment and those seizures that must predicated 
uponjhat traditional protective standard. Because I find that the dramatic accosting of appellant... 
21. 
U.S. 
Pretzinger, 542 F.2d 517, C.A.9 (Ariz.), September 17, 1976(Nos. 76-1589, 
76-1655.76-165576-1589) 
...of privacy and does not constitute search and thus, no warrant is needed to justify installation of 
electronic beeper unless Fourth Amendment rights necessarily would have to be violated in order 
to initially install device. U.S.C.A.Const. Amend. 4 [3] 349 Searches and Seizures 349I In 
General 349 13 What Constitutes Search or Seizure 349 21 k. Use of Electronic Devices; 
Tracking Devices or "Beepers.". (Formerly 349k1 Attachment of electronic location device to 
airplane did not infringe upon any reasonable expectation of privacy and did not constitute search. 
U.S.C.A.Const. Amend. 4 (4) 372 Telecommunications ... 
...banc 537 F.2d 227 (5th Cir.) Consequently, no warrant is needed to justify installation of an 
electronic beeper unless fourth amendment rigilits necessarily would have to be violated in order to 
initially install the device. See United States g Hufford, supra... 
22. P 
U.S. I Epperson, 454 F.2d 769„ C.A.4 (Va.), February 07, 1972(No. 71.1481.71-1481) 
...Defendant appealed. The Court of Appeals, Craven, Circuit Judge, held that exposure of airplane 
passengers to magnetometer constituted "search" within Fourth Amendment but was not 
unreasonable in view of threat of air piracy notwithstanding that no warrant had been obtained; and 
that ... 
...Searches and Seizures 3491 In General 349 13 What Constitutes Search or Seizure 349 21 k. 
Use of Electronic Devices; Tracking Devices or "Beepers.". (Formerly 349k1 349 Searches and 
Seizures 3491 In General 349 72 k. Airport and Boardmg Searches. (Formerly 349k7(24) 
Exposure of airplane passengers to magnetometer constituted "search" within Fourth 
Amendment but was not unreasonable in view of threat of air piracy notwithstanding that no 
warrant had been obtained. Federal Aviation ... 
149 U.S.C.A. § 1472( 1 U.S.C.A.Const. Amend. 4 RI 349 Searches and Seizures 349I In 
General 349 23 k. Fourth Amendment and Reasonableness in General. (Formerly 349k7(I) 
Reasonableness of any search must be determined by balancing governmental interest in search 
and... 
O 2007 Thomson/West. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works. 
... 
conv9cir.Thilikrirft=trilviT .F.Rrfn= tnn/brgs= 
19/2.7/2007 
EFTA00188478

U.S. 
HARVEY 
1439 
CAN as 869 FM ItSIP (Haar. 1959) 
zation in original). The district court ex-
pressed concern with this provision because 
11 U.S.C. § 1322(c) states that a chapter 13 
plan "may not provide for payments over a 
period that is longer than three years, un-
less the court, for cause, approves a longer 
period, but the court may not approve a 
period that is longer than five years." Ob-
viously, it will take Saylors several years to 
pay off the entire mortgage debt at the 
regular monthly rate. We interpret the 
provision at issue, however, simply as the 
bankruptcy court's effort to ensure that 
Jim Walter is treated fairly by the con-
firmed plan; Saylors can cure the mort-
gage arrearage through a chapter 13 ex-
tension plan only if he also keeps his regu-
lar mortgage payments current. 
Conse-
quently, the confirmed plan's requirement 
that Saylors must make his regular month-
ly mortgage payments terminates when the 
arrearage is satisfied.' 
III. CONCLUSION 
The decision of the district court is re-
versed and the order of the bankruptcy 
court confirming Saylors' chapter 13 plan is 
reinstated. 
REVERSED. 
UNITED STATES of America, 
Plaintiff-Appellant, 
I 
Jerry Lee HARVEY, 
Defendant-Appellee. 
No. 874051. 
United States Court of Appeals, 
Eleventh Circuit. 
April 14, 1989. 
Order dismissing indictment charging 
defendant with tax evasion and filing false 
4. This statement, of course, only applies to what 
is required of Saylors by the confirmation order 
of the bankruptcy court. If all goes well and 
Saylors satisfies the arrearage while maintain-
ing his monthly mortgage payments, he probe-
income tax returns with respect to interest 
income from funds deposited in Cayman 
Islands account was entered in the United 
States District Court for the Southern Dis-
trict of Florida, No. 85-06204, James C. 
Paine, J., 651 F.Supp. 894, and Government 
appealed. The Court of Appeals, 848 F.2d 
1647, affirmed. Subsequently, the Court 
of Appeals, 855 F.2d 1492, agreed to rehear 
the case en bane and vacated prior panel opin-
ion. Upon rehearing en bane, the Court of 
Appeals, Kravitch, Circuit Judge, held that 
grant of transactional immunity Govern-
ment extended to defendant in connection 
with drug investigation did not prohibit 
prosecution for tax violations allegedly 
committed in years following grant of im-
munity. 
Reversed and remanded. 
Clark, Circuit Judge, filed dissenting 
opinion in which Hatchet', Circuit Judge, 
joined. 
Hatchet', Circuit Judge, filed dissent-
ing opinion. 
I. Constitutional Law 420265.5 
Due process requires Government to 
adhere to terms of any plea bargain or 
immunity agreement it makes. U.S.C.A. 
Const.Amend. 5. 
2. Criminal Law 4=42 
Although federal law no longer pro-
vides for formal statutory grants of trans-
actional immunity, prosecutor may infor-
mally grant transactional immunity to wit-
ness in return for cooperation in criminal 
case. 18 U.S.C.A. §§ 60014005. 
3. Criminal Law 4=42 
"Use immunity" prohibits use of com-
pelled testimony, or any evidence derived 
directly or indirectly from that testimony, 
against witness in criminal prosecution. 
See publication Words and Phrases 
for other judicial constructions and 
definitions. 
bly will find himself in the position of any 
non-bankrupt nonrecourse debtor. He will be 
required by state law to continue making his 
mortgage payments until the entire debt is satis-
fied or risk losing his home. 
EFTA00188479

1440 
869 FEDERAL REPORTER, 2d SERIES 
4. Criminal Law sw42 
Use 
immunity 
does not prohibit 
Government from prosecuting witness for 
crimes about which he testified, provided 
Government proves that it has other evi-
dence to support prosecution that is derived 
from legitimate source wholly independent 
of compelled testimony. 
6. Criminal Law al=.42 
When defendant has demonstrated 
that he has testified under grant of use 
immunity, burden shifts to prosecution 
which then has affirmative duty to prove 
that evidence it proposes to use is derived 
from legitimate source wholly independent 
of testimony given under grant of immuni-
ty. 
6. Criminal Law 4=42 
Informal transactional immunity de-
fendant received in connection with disci°• 
sure of his Illegal activities in drug trade 
did not prohibit Government from prosecut-
ing defendant for tax violations committed 
after grant of immunity, even though tax 
violations related to money derived from 
drug trade. 
7. Criminal Law a=42 
Purpose of grant of transactional or 
use immunity is to preclude witness' re-
fiance on his Fifth Amendment privilege 
against 
compelled 
self-incrimination: 
Government may compel witness to testify 
by granting him immunity, provided that 
scope of immunity is as least as great as 
that of Fifth Amendment privilege that wit-
ness must forego. U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 
5. 
8. Criminal Law sa493(1) 
In general, privilege against self-in-
crimination only prohibits compelled testi-
mony that might incriminate witness for 
crimes he had already committed, or was in 
process of committing, at time testimony 
was given. U.S.C.A. Const.Amend. 5. 
Roger M. Olsen, Atty. Gen., Michael L. 
Paup, Chief, Robert E. Lindeay, Alan 
Hechtkopf, Appellate Section, Tax Division, 
U.S. Dept. of Justice, Washington, D.C., 
for plaintiff-appellant. 
Leonard Alan Sands, Coconut Grove, 
Fla., for defendant-appellee. 
Appeal from the United States District 
Court for the Southern District of Florida. 
Before RONEY, Chief Judge, 
TJOFLAT, HILL, FAY, VANCE, 
KRAVITCH, JOHNSON, HATCHETT, 
ANDERSON, CLARK, EDMONDSON, 
and COX, Circuit Judges. 
KRAVITCH, Circuit Judge: 
Appellee Jerry Lee Harvey disclosed his 
illegal activities in the drug trade to Drug 
Enforcement Administration agents under 
an unwritten informal grant of immunity in 
1980. Four years later a grand jury indict-
ed Harvey for failing to report the interest 
income earned on the proceeds of those 
drug-related activities in the years leading 
up to and following the 1980 grant of im-
munity. Harvey moved to dismiss the in-
dictment, arguing that the 1980 informal 
grant of immunity protected him from 
prosecution. The district court, upon the 
recommendation of the magistrate, agreed 
and dismissed the indictment with preju-
dice. 
United States 
Harvey, 651 
F.Supp. 894 (S.D.Fla.1986). The govern-
ment appealed the dismissal of those 
counts that charged violations for the years 
following the grant of immunity. A divid-
ed panel of this court affirmed. 848 F.2d 
1547 (11th Cir.1988). 
We determined to 
rehear this case in bane and vacated the 
panel opinion. 855 F.2d 1492 (11th Cir. 
1988). We now REVERSE the order of the 
district court dismissing those counts of 
the indictment that relate to offenses alleg-
edly committed after the grant of immunity 
to Harvey. 
I. THE FACTS 
On November 27, 1986 a grand jury in 
die Southern District of Florida returned 
an indictment charging Harvey with five 
counts of income tax evasion for the years 
1978 through 1982, in violation of 26 U.S.C. 
EFTA00188480

Palm Beach billionaire faces second sex-assault lawsuit -- South Florida Sun-Sentinel.com 
Page 1 of 1 
sun-sentinel.cominews/localipalmbeach/sfl-206sexsuit,0,4680990.story 
South Florida Sun-Sentinel.com 
Palm Beach billionaire faces second sex-assault lawsuit 
By Nancy Oth0n 
Sun-Sentinel.com 
12:01 PM EST, February 6, 2008 
Billionaire and part-time Palm Beach resident Jeffrey 
Epstein was sued for the second time in less than two 
weeks Wednesday, this time by another teenager who 
claims she was sexually abused at his mansion. 
The 16-year-old Virginia girl is represented by the same 
attorney who filed a $50 million federal lawsuit in late 
January against Epstein, 55. This lawsuit seeks similar 
damages for an alleged sexual assault and intentional 
infliction of emotional distress. 
Jeffrey Herman, the teen's attorney, is planning a news 
conference in West Palm Beach this afternoon to discuss 
the allegations. 
Nothing down. 
No closing costs*. 
CENTEX HOMES 
IA loan ✓e 3 eu fixtclicus 
;Om iglu. 
Epstein, arrested in 2006 on a felony charge of solicitation of prostitution, is scheduled to appear in 
court next month for a status hearing. The New York resident is accused of luring young girls to his 
mansion for massages that turned sexual. 
The lawsuit alleges that Epstein has a sexual preference and "obsession for underage minor girls" and 
sought to gain access to economically disadvantaged younger girls in his home for paid massages. 
The 16-year-old girl, identified in the lawsuit as "Jane Doe No. 2," has suffered traumatic injuries, 
according to the complaint. 
When the first lawsuit was filed Epstein's attorneys said Epstein never had sex with the girl, who was 14 
at the time, and that the lawsuit was motivated by greed. 
Nancy °than can be reached at nothon®sun-sentinet com or 561-228-5502. 
Copyright O 2008, So_u Florida Sun-Sentinel 
•• 
•I 
I
I 
/t1A/NO 
EFTA00188481