The opinion of the court was delivered by: Spatt, District Judge.
In this case, the Court is dealing with issues which may be
more comfortably handled in a state court in Wyoming.
This case involves charges against the defendant Patrick
Jensen ("Jensen" or the "defendant") for making false statements
to an officer in the United States Fish and Wildlife Service
("USFWS") in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1001(a)(2). Presently
before the Court is a motion by the defendant to (1) inspect the
grand jury minutes; (2) dismiss the indictment; (3) suppress
statements made by the defendant; (4) require a bill of
particulars; (5) produce all documents and tangible objects; (6)
produce all Brady material; and (7) produce Jencks Act
The Federal Government owns the Wertheim National Wildlife
Refuge in Shirley, New York (the "Wertheim Refuge" or the
"Refuge"). USFWS, a division of the United States Department of
the Interior, is responsible for the preservation and protection
of wildlife in the Wertheim Refuge. In particular, USFWS is
responsible for providing law enforcement to protect wildlife
from poaching activities and ensure the safety of visitors at
Marto then asked the defendant whether he was involved in the
gunshots. The defendant responded that he had heard the gunshots
but had no involvement with them. The defendant also stated that
he entered the Refuge without permission at the northern end of
the fire trail and was merely walking through the Refuge to
observe wildlife. Next, Marto asked the defendant whether he was
in possession of a firearm. The defendant responded that he was
not in possession of a firearm and he did not own a firearm of
any kind. Marto then allowed the defendant to walk north on the
fire trail in the direction of the exit of the Refuge.
Shortly thereafter, Marto discovered a large antlered 8-point
white-tailed deer with a fresh gunshot wound to the back of its
neck. Immediately, Marto proceeded in the direction of the
defendant attempting to find him. At the exit of the Refuge,
Marto saw the defendant and approached him.
Now joined by police officers from the Suffolk County Park,
Marto asked the defendant about his involvement or knowledge
concerning the gunshots and the wounded deer. The defendant
again denied having any knowledge of the gunshots and denied any
involvement in the wounding of the deer. The defendant also
stated that he saw several dead deer in the vicinity where Marto
discovered the wounded deer.
Apparently, after this questioning, Marto allowed the
defendant to leave the area. Thereafter, unidentified USFWS
officers searched the field and discovered three headless
white-tailed deer carcasses and one freshly killed large
antlered 15-point white-tailed deer carcass.
On November 21, 2000, unidentified officers of the Refuge,
unidentified personnel from the New York State Department of
Environmental Conservation ("DEC") and DEC Forest Ranger Mark
St. Claire ("St. Claire") discovered a black soft-sided case
containing a 30-06 Remington rifle model 700 DBL, bearing serial
number B6720779 (the "Remington rifle") leaning against a tree
which was located about three feet outside the boundary of the
Refuge. Later that day, Marto and St. Claire removed a
discharged bullet from the 15-point white-tailed deer carcass.
Marto and St. Claire also recovered spent shell casings in and
around the vicinity of where the Remington rifle was found.
Subsequently, the bullet and shell casings were sent to the
National Fish and Wildlife Forensics Laboratory (the "NFWFL")
for ballistic tests. After its investigation, the NFWFL
determined conclusively that the shell casings were from bullets
discharged from the Remington rifle and that the discharged
bullet in the deer had the same rifling characteristics and
could have been fired though the barrel of the Remington rifle.
A. As to the Inspection of the Grand Jury Minutes
Rule 6 of the Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure provides
that a district court may permit the disclosure of matters
before the grand jury "upon a showing that grounds may exist for
a motion to dismiss the indictment because of matters occurring
before the grand jury. . . ." Fed.R.Crim.P. 6(e)(3)(C)(ii).
"Grand jury proceedings carry a `presumption of regularity.'"
United States v. Torres, 901 F.2d 205, 232-33 (2d Cir. 1990)
(citing Hamling v. United States, 418 U.S. 87, 139 n. 23, 94
S.Ct. 2887, 2918 n. 23, 41 L.Ed.2d 590 (1974) (internal
quotations and citations omitted).
However, review of the grand jury minutes is "rarely permitted
without specific factual allegations of government misconduct."
Torres, 901 F.2d at 233 (citation omitted). Further, "`as a
general matter, a district court may not dismiss an indictment
for errors in grand jury proceedings unless such errors
prejudiced the defendants.'" Id. (quoting Bank of ...