United States v. Frederick Banks
693 F. App'x 119
| 3rd Cir. | 2017Background
- Frederick Banks, a federal criminal defendant whose proceedings in multiple cases are closed and who has completed his sentence, filed motions seeking unsealing of Probation Office records, sealed mental-health evaluations, and any FISA materials.
- The District Court denied Banks’s unsealing motion as to Criminal No. 03-245, finding no sealed mental-health evaluations or FISA warrant materials in that case.
- Banks claimed standing based on his participation in public debates about law enforcement and alleged (but unproven) conspiratorial use of "Voice to Skull" technology involving the Probation Office and CIA.
- The District Court docket showed Banks received the presentence report and actively litigated it through multiple motions and objections.
- The Third Circuit summarily affirmed, concluding Banks lacked standing and pointed to no sealed evidence used against him or any FISA-obtained materials in his case.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Does Banks have standing to move to unseal documents from his closed criminal case? | Banks argued he has an informational interest and participates in debates about law enforcement; Probation records would inform that debate. | Government (and District Court) argued Banks suffered no concrete, particularized injury from sealing and thus lacks standing. | Held: Banks lacks standing; generalized informational interest and speculative grievances insufficient. |
| Are there sealed mental-health evaluations or FISA warrant materials to unseal in Crim. No. 03-245? | Banks asserted such materials may exist and should be unsealed. | Government and District Court found no sealed mental-health evaluations or FISA materials in that case and Banks pointed to no evidence obtained via FISA. | Held: No showing such materials exist; motion denied as to Crim. No. 03-245. |
| Can Banks rely on speculative conspiracy allegations to support unsealing? | Banks claimed Probation Office involvement in a CIA scheme (Voice to Skull), implying need for records. | Government noted allegations are unsubstantiated and previously described by courts as delusional; speculation does not confer standing. | Held: Speculative conspiracy claims do not establish standing or justify unsealing. |
| If sealed records are relevant to a pending case, how should they be obtained? | Banks sought broad unsealing from closed cases. | Government noted that defense counsel in any pending proceeding can request relevant documents within that proceeding. | Held: Any relevant sealed materials should be sought through the pending proceeding; broad unsealing denied. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Pickard, 733 F.3d 1297 (10th Cir. 2013) (standing requires a concrete, particularized injury)
- Hollingsworth v. Perry, 133 S. Ct. 2652 (2013) (generalized grievances do not confer standing)
- United States v. Vampire Nation, 451 F.3d 189 (3d Cir. 2006) (discussing evidence used in Banks’s prior conviction)