FBI Agents Conducted Unreasonable Search by Posing as Repairmen

A federal judge has ruled that the FBI acted inappropriately in an investigation into championship poker player Paul Phua last year. The FBI conducted a search of Phua’s room without a warrant, after posing as repairmen to gain entry. Federal Judge Andrew Gordon, located in Las Vegas, determined that the FBI’s actions violated Phua’s rights to be protected from unreasonable searches and seizures.

The FBI began to investigate Phua last summer after they suspected that he and his associates were illegally taking bets on the Poker World Cup. At the time of the investigation, Phua was staying at Caesar’s Palace in Las Vegas. The FBI shut off the internet to his room, then came in posing as repairmen to fix it, hoping to get a look at what was going on in the room. They wore hidden cameras on their bodies in order to get footage of the room and whatever they saw that pointed to Phua’s guilt. Phua, and others including his son, were then charged.

While some, including Phua’s son Darren, have pled guilty to the federal charges related to gambling, Phua has continued to fight the charges. This is in part because of the nature in which the FBI obtained the evidence. That argument proved convincing to Judge Gordon, who stated in his ruling:

Permitting the government to create the need for the occupant to invite a third party into his or her home would effectively allow the government to conduct warrantless searches of the vast majority of residences and hotel rooms in America. The government need only disrupt the phone, cable, Internet, or some other ‘non-essential’ service, and reasonable people will opt to invite a third party onto their property to repair it, unwittingly allowing a government agents into the most private space to view and record whatever and whomever they see.

As a result of Gordon’s ruling, the evidence that was collected in Phua’s hotel room via the FBI agents cannot be used in his trial. Prosecutors will have to figure out whether or not it’s even worth moving forward the case. They apparently do have other evidence, but it’s not as strong.

This is apparently a unique case and it could serve as a deterrent to keep the FBI from making similar searches in the future. Judge Gordon’s point is compelling. If all the FBI had to do to get into someone’s house was deceive them, they could infringe on various parties’ privacy quite easily. While Phua may or may not win his case, Gordon’s decision certainly weakens the FBI’s claims.

Anneliese Mahoney

Anneliese Mahoney is Managing Editor at Law Street and a Connecticut transplant to Washington D.C. She has a Bachelor’s degree in International Affairs from the George Washington University, and a passion for law, politics, and social issues. Contact Anneliese at amahoney@LawStreetMedia.com.