- 44 -
pattern or racketeering activity, money laundering, failing
to file CTR's, conspiring to commit extortion, and aiding
and abetting extortion was affirmed by the Court of
Appeals. United States v. London, 66 F.3d 1227 (1st Cir.
1995). Furthermore, in these cases, like Fleming v. United
States, supra, the intercepted communications were made
part of the public record of Mr. London's criminal
prosecution, so that petitioners' privacy interest in the
subject communication is extremely weak.
In passing, we note that on appeal Mr. London, seeking
to overturn the District Court's denial of his motion to
suppress evidence, argued that the electronic surveillance
conducted at Heller's Cafe in 1986 violated the Federal
wiretap law in five ways:
(1) no Department of Justice official designated
in 18 U.S.C. � 2516(1) had authorized the local
United States Attorney to apply for the initial
interception orders; (2) the orders improperly
allowed the government to monitor conversations
relating to money laundering, which was not an
offense for which interception could be ordered,
see 18 U.S.C. � 2516(1)(a)-(o), on the date the
interception orders issued; (3) the government
intercepted and disclosed extortion-related
conversations--conversations pertaining to the
paying of "rent" to Ferrara--beyond the scope of
the court's orders; (4) the court ordered and
the government employed inadequate minimization
procedures under 18 U.S.C. � 2518(5); and (5)
the government's application misled the district
court as to the necessity for conducting
Page: Previous 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011