United States v. Levy
2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 17154
2d Cir.2015Background
- David Levy, under federal investigation for securities fraud, returned to Miami International Airport; CBP detained him and inspected his luggage based on information from a DEA-led task force.
- CBP examined and photocopied an 18-page personal notebook containing business contacts, account data, and handwritten notes; the original was returned and Levy departed.
- Within 72 hours Levy was indicted (later superseded) on securities fraud, conspiracy, and money-laundering charges tied to the schemes under investigation.
- Levy moved to suppress the photocopy of the notebook; the District Court deemed the notebook search “non-routine” but upheld it as supported by reasonable suspicion and denied suppression.
- At trial the parties stipulated to admission of the photocopy; the Government used notebook entries to link Levy to illegal trades and co-conspirators; Levy was convicted and appealed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether CBP may inspect and photocopy a traveler’s personal documents at the border based on reasonable suspicion arising from another federal agency’s information | Levy: CBP cannot conduct non-routine searches to investigate crimes outside CBP’s statutory/regulatory remit (contraband, duties, immigration, terrorism) | Government: Border search doctrine allows CBP to inspect and copy items when officers have reasonable suspicion, even if prompted by another agency and even for crimes outside CBP’s usual focus | CBP may lawfully inspect and copy the notebook; search upheld as supported by reasonable suspicion derived from DEA task force information |
| Whether the search required reasonable suspicion or was “routine” (no suspicion needed) | Levy: Close reading and photocopying of documents is a non-routine, privacy-intrusive search requiring heightened justification | Government: Even if non-routine, here reasonable suspicion existed; routine/non-routine distinction not outcome-determinative because suspicion was present | Court avoided definitively labeling the search routine; concluded reasonable suspicion existed and justified the search |
| Whether CBP may rely on information from other federal agencies to form reasonable suspicion for a border search | Levy: Reliance on another agency should not permit CBP to investigate outside its authorized scope | Government: Interagency sharing is permissible; suspicion need not originate from CBP’s own probe | Court held CBP may rely on information from other federal agencies to justify border searches |
| Whether evidence discovered by CBP of crimes unrelated to importation/duties is admissible | Levy: Such evidence should be outside CBP’s authority and suppressed | Government: CBP may seize instrumentalities/evidence of other federal crimes discovered during lawful border searches | Court held CBP may inspect and copy evidence of other federal crimes found during a border search when justified by reasonable suspicion |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Montoya de Hernandez, 473 U.S. 531 (routine border searches do not require reasonable suspicion)
- Tabbaa v. Chertoff, 509 F.3d 89 (2d Cir.) (upholding broad government authority for routine border searches)
- United States v. Irving, 452 F.3d 110 (2d Cir.) (Customs area of an airport is functional equivalent of a border; motive does not invalidate border search)
- United States v. Flores-Montano, 541 U.S. 149 (routine searches at the border can include inspection of belongings)
- United States v. Gurr, 471 F.3d 144 (D.C. Cir.) (customs officers who discover instrumentalities or evidence of other crimes may seize them)
- United States v. Schoor, 597 F.2d 1303 (9th Cir.) (search at request of other agency does not negate legitimacy)
- Ali v. Fed. Bureau of Prisons, 552 U.S. 214 (discussion of interagency assistance to customs officials)
- United States v. Seljan, 547 F.3d 993 (9th Cir.) (agents need not ignore evidence of other unlawful activity found during authorized searches)