United States v. Duka
671 F.3d 329
| 3rd Cir. | 2011Background
- Consolidated appeal of Shnewer, Duka brothers, and Tatar over a two-and-a-half-month jury trial on a Fort Dix attack plot.
- Evidence included recordings, informants, surveillance footage, beheading videos, and map of Fort Dix used for planning.
- Defendants convicted of conspiracy to murder U.S. military personnel; four defendants also convicted of firearm offenses.
- Duka brothers and Shnewer illegally entered the U.S. and sought to purchase automatic weapons via a controlled sale.
- Court vacated Shnewer’s Count 4 (attempted possession of firearms) and remanded to dismiss that count and related fine.
- Court affirmed most convictions and sentences, with some adjustments to counts and assessments.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| FISA challenge to Fourth Amendment | FISA's significant purpose standard unlawful under Fourth Amendment | Significant purpose is reasonable and constitutional | Significant purpose standard reasonable; evidence admissible |
| Admission of coconspirator statements against Tatar | District court abused Rule 801(d)(2)(E) admission | Statements should be excluded as not in furtherance | First set admitted; second set abused but harmless |
| Reliance on FISA evidence and exclusionary rule | Convictions tainted; FISA-derived evidence must be excluded | N/A | Even if unconstitutional, Krull rule bars exclusion; convictions affirmed |
| Count 4 (Shnewer) invalidity and remand | Count 4 valid as attempted possession under 924(c) | Count 4 not cognizable offense | Vacate Count 4; remand to dismiss with refund of assessment |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Duggan, 743 F.2d 59 (2d Cir.1984) (primary vs significant purpose debates in FISA context)
- United States v. Wen, 477 F.3d 896 (3d Cir.2007) (administrative searches and admissibility of evidence from non-law-enforcement searches)
- United States v. Abu-Jihaad, 630 F.3d 102 (2d Cir.2010) (significant purpose standard and FISA protections)
- Krull, 480 U.S. 340 (1987) (exclusionary rule not applied when reliance on statute is reasonable)
- Sealed Case, 310 F.3d 717 (Foreign Intel.Surv.Ct.Rev.2002) (analysis of FISA amendments and safeguards)