Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-91-01153/USCOURTS-ca10-91-01153-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Paul R. Carter
Not Party
Executive Finance Company
Appellant
National Commodity and Barter Association
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS 

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT 

NATIONAL COMMODITY AND BARTER ) 

ASSOCIATION: its service wing, NATIONAL) 

COMMODITY EXCHANGE: EXECUTIVE FINANCE ) 

COMPANY, ) 

Petitioners-Appellants, 

and 

·PAUL R. CARTER, 

Petitioner, 

v. 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, and a Grand 

Jury thereof, 

Respondent-Appellee. 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

JUL 3 0 1e92 

ROBERT L. HOECKER 

Clerk 

No. 91-1153 

(D.C. No. 90-Y-20) 

(D. Colo.) 

Before LOGAN, EBEL, and KELLY, Circuit Judges. 

After examining the briefs and appellate record, this panel 

has determined unanimously that oral argument would not materially 

assist the determination of this appeal. See Fed. R. App. P. 

* This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall 

not be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, 

except for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of 

the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. 10th Cir. R. 

36.3. 

Appellate Case: 91-1153 Document: 010110275179 Date Filed: 07/30/1992 Page: 1
34(a); 10th Cir. R. ·34.1.9. The case is therefore ordered 

submitted without oral argument. 

Petitioners National Commodity and Barter Association, 

National Commodity Exchange, and Executive Finance Company appeal 

the district court's refusal to quash grand jury subpoenas duces 

tecum served on their respective custodians of records. They also 

appeal the district court's determination that they are in 

contempt of court for refusing to comply with the subpoenas. 

The parties agree that the issues pertinent to the motion to 

quash the subpoenas are identical to those decided in National 

Commodity & Barter Ass'n v. United States, 951 F.2d 1172 (10th 

Cir. 1991). Petitioners cite the recent case of United States v. 

P.H.E., Inc., No. 91-4149, 1992 WL 110278 (10th Cir. May 26, 

1992), for the proposition that they are entitled to protection 

from a prosecution brought to interfere with their constitutional 

rights. We perceive no facts or arguments in this appeal not 

raised in the prior appeal showing that the government's 

involvement is a pretext for interfering with constitutionally 

protected rights. Consequently, P.H.E .• Inc. does not mandate 

reversal. 

We review the district court's finding of contempt under 28 

u.s.c. § 1826 for abuse of discretion. In re Grand Jury 

Proceedings (Mallory), 797 F.2d 906, 907 (10th Cir. 1986). 

According to Petitioners, they had "just cause" for failure to 

comply: the government "fail[ed] to show a nexus between the 

2 

Appellate Case: 91-1153 Document: 010110275179 Date Filed: 07/30/1992 Page: 2
allegedly illegal activity of one undercover agent and the conduct 

of the affairs of the [Petitioners] as a whole." Appellants' Br. 

at 31. 

Here, the district court adjudged Petitioners in contempt of 

court after they had been ordered twice to produce the subpoenaed 

documents, once in the prior case and again in this case. 

Furthermore, Petitioners' argument was rejected in the prior 

appeal. National Commodity & Barter Ass'n, 951 F.2d at 1175 ("The 

government has also met its burden of demonstrating a substantial 

relationship between the subpoenaed records and its compelling 

interest in the criminal investigation."). Petitioners do not 

challenge the amount of the monetary sanction imposed by the 

district court. Therefore, we find no abuse of discretion in the 

district court's contempt order. 

For the reasons stated in National Commodity & Barter Ass'n, 

951 F.2d 1172, the district court's order denying Petitioners' 

motion to quash is AFFIRMED. For the reasons stated above, the 

district court's finding that Petitioners are in contempt of 

court, and its order that Petitioners collectively shall pay 

$50.00 per day commencing August 27, 1990, until they comply with 

the subpoenas, are also AFFIRMED. 

Entered for the Court 

David M. Ebel 

Circuit Judge 

3 

Appellate Case: 91-1153 Document: 010110275179 Date Filed: 07/30/1992 Page: 3