Court Opinion

ID: 9475940
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-05 05:43:10.316169+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:45:02.221086
License: Public Domain

TORRUELLA, Circuit Judge
(concurring).
I concur in the judgment of the court and in parts I — III of the majority opinion. I write separately to express my view that the ex parte affidavit, alone, provides adequate support for the district court’s refusal to quash the subpoena. We have not hesitated to rely on such affidavits in other circumstances where the government has demonstrated the importance of maintaining secrecy. See, e.g., Application of Kingsley, 802 F.2d 571, 577 (1st Cir.1986). The affidavit provides ample basis for the district court’s determination that “[t]he grand jury seeks the documents in connection with another investigation involving other charges of crimes allegedly committed in this district.” In re Grand Jury Subpoena, 626 F.Supp. 1057, 1060 (D.P.R.1986) (emphasis supplied). As long as the grand jury is investigating a separate crime I do not understand why the independence or lack of independence of the grand jury from “the government’s general prosecutorial strategies,” ante at 72, would be material. Similarly, I am not troubled that the affidavit is from an FBI agent. His detailed factual allegations justify a grand jury investigation into the travels of Fernández Diamante.