Roger W. Miller - Page 12

                                                - 12 -                                                  

               find no such conduct in the instant case.  Although it is                                
               not standard practice in the Border Patrol to ask people who                             
               are carrying large amounts of currency questions about tax                               
               returns, Reese explained that he asked petitioner tax                                    
               questions to determine whether petitioner had a legitimate                               
               source for his income.  Reese's questions about petitioner's                             
               tax returns in the circumstances of this case do not                                     
               indicate that tax violations were in his zone of primary                                 
               interest.                                                                                
               Agreement Between Agencies                                                               
                   Petitioner contends that an agreement to share                                       
               information between agencies in this case mandates                                       
               application of the exclusionary rule.  Courts frequently                                 
               examine whether agreements exist between agencies, to                                    
               determine whether suppressing evidence illegally obtained by                             
               one agency and offered by another will deter future unlawful                             
               searches and seizures.  Grimes v. Commissioner, supra at                                 
               290; Wolf v. Commissioner, supra at 195; Tirado v.                                       
               Commissioner, supra at 314-315; Guzzetta v. Commissioner, 78                             
               T.C. 173, 180-182 (1982); Black Forge, Inc. v. Commissioner,                             
               supra at 1011.  Although generally recognizing that such                                 
               agreements increase the likelihood that deterrence will be                               
               achieved by applying the exclusionary rule, courts have                                  
               considered a variety of elements in determining whether the                              





Page:  Previous  1  2  3  4  5  6  7  8  9  10  11  12  13  14  15  16  Next

Last modified: May 25, 2011