IN THE COUNTY COURT OF THE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA CASE NO. DIVISION STATE OF FLORIDA VS. ROBERT KRAFT, Defendant. ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO Defendant?s Motion to Suppress came before the Court on April 26, April 30, and May 1, 2019. William A. Burck, Esq. and Alexander B. Spiro, Esq. represented Defendant. Michael G. Kridos, Judith S. Arco, and Elizabeth Neto, Assistant State Attorneys, represented the State of Florida. Based on the testimony. evidence, case and statutory law, and argument ofcounsel, the Court ?nds: 1. Defendant is charged with violating and Florida Statutes, soliciting another to commit prostitution, pursuant to Inforrnations filed February 25, 2019.2 2. On or about January 15, 2019, Detective Andrew Sharp of the Jupiter Police Department submitted to Circuit Judge Howard Coates an eleven-page search warrant titled Affidavit and Application for Search Warrant Authorizing The Monitoring And Recording Of Visual, Non-Audio Conduct, copy ofwhich is attached hereto as Exhibit A. On January 15, 2019, Judge Coates signed a Search Warrant Authorizing the Monitoring And Recording ofVisua], Non-Audio Contact, copy of which attached hereto as Exhibit B, relying on Det. Sharp?s Af?davit in issuing the search warrant. 3. On the basis of the search warrant, Det. Sharp surreptitiously installed ?ve cameras in Orchids of Asia Day Spa located in Jupiter, Florida. One camera captured video of people entering the front section of the business. All customers seeking services at the Spa entered this section and paid for the desired services at the front desk. After paying for services, the customer was then taken to one of a number ofmassage rooms. Det. Sharp installed hidden surveillance cameras in four of the massage rooms. These cameras captured visual images only and had no audio recording capability. These rooms were recorded continuously while the Spa was open for business for ?ve consecutive days. 4. On January 19, 2019 and January 20, 2019, a hidden camera captured images of Defendant allegedly engaging in illegal sexual activity.3 When Defendant left the Spa on January 19, 2019, he entered a car as a passenger and a Jupiter police of?cer followed the car for a brief time. The of?cer then radioed to another Jupiter police of?cer that Defendant was approaching the area where the second of?cer was stationed, and the second of?cer got behind and eventually stopped the car. The sole purpose of stopping the car was to identify Defendant as the person who had left the Spa a few minutes earlier. 5. Defendant invokes the Fourth Amendment4 in seeking to suppress the videotapes of Defendant allegedly engaging in illegal activity. The alleged criminal activity occurred not in a home, where the most stringent Fourth Amendment protection is granted, but in a commercial setting. However, the ?capacity to claim the protection of the Fourth 2 Amendment depends not upon a property right in the invaded place but upon whether the person who claims the protection of the Amendment has a legitimate expectation of privacy in the invaded place.?5 While Defendant was an invitee of the business establishment in which the alleged acts occurred, the Court ?nds it clear that he had a reasonable, subjective expectation of privacy, as would anyone seeking a private massage in a commercial or professional setting, and that the activity in that room would remain private. Seeking even legitimate services in a spa normally involves removing all or most ofa person?s clothing, behavior almost as private as would occur in a home. Furthermore, that expectation of privacy is one which this Court believes society objectively supports as reasonable.6 6. That Defendant may have been engaged in criminal activity is not material in determining whether society is prepared to recognize an objective expectation of privacy. As stated in McDade v. State: Privacy expectations do not hinge on the nature of defendant?s activities innocent or criminal. In fact, many Fourth Amendment issues arise precisely because the defendants were engaged in illegal activity on the premises for which they claim privacy interests.7 The McDade court goes on to say that: We may not justify the search after the fact, once we know illegal activity was afoot; the legitimate expectation or privacy does not depend on the nature of the defendant?s activities, whether innocent or criminal.8 Because Defendant had a subjective expectation of privacy, an expectation society would 3 find objectively reasonable, Defendant has standing to challenge the search warrant. 7. There are no federal or Florida statutes speci?cally authorizing or prohibiting surreptitious video surveillance, also called ?sneak and peek? or delayed notice searches. Likewise, there are no rules of criminal procedure, federal or Florida, specifically addressing surreptitious video surveillance. There is also a dearth of Florida cases offering guidance on this issue.9 Consequently, courts (mainly federal) have relied on a combination of Fourth Amendment principles, statutory guidelines, and rules of criminal procedure employed in analogous situations to determine the admissibility of evidence obtained through surreptitious video surveillance. While Florida courts are bound only to follow United States Supreme Court decisions on Fourth Amendment issues,10 the uniquely intrusive nature of video surveillance, and how infrequently it seems to be employed in Florida, indicates to this Court that federal case law is instructive. 8. The primary case guiding this Court, as it has other courts, is United States v. Mesa~ Rm.? This is one ofthe cases Detective Sharp cited and relied on in his search warrant. 9. Mesa-Rincon involved surreptitious video surveillance conducted at the request of the United States Secret Service in a specified building in which the defendants were suspected of counterfeiting United States currency. The court?s order authorized nonverbal conduct to be intercepted and recorded. The order authorized the equipment to be installed and maintained surreptitiously. Video surveillance captured the suspects counterfeiting. Defendants moved to suppress all video evidence. The court denied Defendants? motion. The court relied on a combination of federal criminal rules (Rule 41b), federal case law, and 4 federal statutory law (Title of the Omnibus Crime Control and Safe Streets Act of 1968) in finding the court had authority to issue the search warrant. The court acknowledged Congress had not defined the constitutional requirements for video surveillance. 10. Mesa-Rincon, in considering the purpose of the Fourth Amendment and intrusiveness of video surveillance, establishes ?ve requirements a court must consider before video surveillance can be permitted. Those five requirements are: a. a showing that probable cause exists that a particular person is committing, has committed, or is about to commit a crime; b. the order particularly describes the place to be searched and the things to be seized in accordance with the Fourth Amendment; c. the order is sufficiently precise so as to minimize the recording of activities not related to the crimes under investigation; (1. the judge issuing the order ?nds that normal investigative procedures have been tried and have failed or reasonably appear to be unlikely to succeed if tried or appear to be too dangerous; e. the order does not allow the period of interception to be longer than necessary to achieve the objective of the authorization, or in any event no longer than thirty days.12 1 l. Suppressing the unlawfully seized evidence is the remedy for failing to satisfy these ?ve requirements.13 12. A reviewing court is required to give great deference? to a magistrate?s probable cause determination? and its function is ?simply to ensure that the issuing magistrate had a substantial basis for concluding that probable cause existed.?l4 This Court ?nds that the search warrant affidavit ofDet. Sharp provided a suf?cient basis for the issuingjudge to find 5 probable cause to conduct the search. 13. This Court further ?nds that the search warrant satis?es the particularity requirement. It speci?cally names Hua Zhang as being in control of the premises, and further authorizes ?video recordings of individuals engaged in acts related to these violations.? This broad description is similar to language approved in Mesa-Rincon.15 14. The Court ?nds Defendant has failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the highly intrusive technique of surreptitious video surveillance is unreasonable under the circumstances. Video surveillance requires a very high showing ofnecessity, higher than audio surveillance. The video surveillance of the lobby and front desk is clearly acceptable as this is a public area of the Spa where a client would have a very low expectation of privacy. That expectation of privacy increases exponentially when the client enters one of the massage rooms; however, the unique circumstances of a massage room creates the need for an unusually intrusive law enforcement technique. That other agencies may have employed different law enforcement techniques is not persuasive to this Court, especially considering the risk of alerting the Spa to being the subject of an investigation. 15. The Court also finds the time limitation, ?ve days unless otherwise approved by the court, to be reasonable and consistent with 16. However, the Court ?nds the minimization requirement has not been satis?ed in at least two respects: ?rst, the search warrant itself is insuf?cient; and, second, minimization techniques were not suf?ciently employed. 17. The order approved by the court in Mesa-Rincon speci?cally required minimization 6 and outlined the minimization procedures to be followed.? The search warrant in this case does little to none of that. The search warrant does describe the places where cameras are to be installed, specifying no cameras are to be placed in the kitchen, bathroom, and personal bedrooms. But a spa client, whether engaging in innocent or illegal activity, would not be likely to frequent those three areas. The search warrant does not assert that criminal activity is suspected to be occurring in these three areas. Consequently, that limitation does little to further minimization. Furthermore, the search warrant does not address how to minimize the impact of video surveillance on female Spa clients. All of the assertions of illegal activity in the search warrant suggest or describe only male genital stimulation. The pre-search warrant investigation such as reviewing websites and reviews of the Spa contained therein, obtaining physical evidence, and seeing slang terms used to describe alleged illegal activities in the Spa all focused on male clientele. However, the Spa advertised services for women clients and, in fact, more than one woman had a signi?cant portion ofher Spa time viewed by a detective?monitor and the entirety of her spa time recorded and placed in Jupiter Police Department records. Failing to consider and include instructions on minimizing the impact on women, through a highly intrusive law enforcement technique in a setting with a high legitimate expectation of privacy, is a serious ?aw in the search warrant, especially considering that the search warrant did not allege women were seeking illegal contact. 18. The search warrant also fails to include any minimization techniques or directives as to how detective-monitors should respond when viewing male Spa clients receiving lawful services, or male clients when no probable cause can be established. This omission is also a 7 serious ?aw in the search warrant. The testimony indicates the videotapes of these individuals remain in the records of the Jupiter Police Department. 19. The Court also finds that the implementation ofminimization techniques was ?awed. Both detective-monitors testi?ed that their only direction about minimization consisted of being directed to look for illegal activity. That direction is simply insufficient to satisfy the minimization requirement.i8 Also, there were no written guidelines provided to the detective-monitors to direct their minimization. ?9 Consequently, the detective?monitors did not have a common standard to guide them as to how they were to minimize surveilling innocent behavior or behavior that did not rise to the level of probable cause. The detective- monitors were simply left to their own standards and devices to satisfy the minimization requirement. One of the detective-monitors testi?ed about discussing minimization with a spouse who also works in law enforcement. The other detective-monitor testi?ed that he relied on previous experience in determining what and how to minimize. Knowledge about minimization in general does not satisfy the minimization required in a speci?c setting, especially one with a legitimately high expectation ofprivacy. This resulted in inconsistent application ofminimization techniques. 20. The fact that some totally innocent women and men had their entire lawful time spent in a massage room fully recorded and Viewed intermittently by a detective-monitor is unacceptable and results from the lack of suf?cient pre-monitoring written guidelines. As previously noted, the search warrant af?davit gave no indication that women sought any form of sexual contact at the Spa. The detective?monitor?s explanation that she was not sure 8 whether the woman would partake in illegal sexual contact is not acceptable and results from a lack of clear, written guidelines. 21. During the course of ?ve days of video surveillance, the detective-monitors observed two circumstances that should have alerted them that illegal activity was not likely to occur during a massage and those individuals? exposure to surveillance should have been minimized. These circumstances are those individuals (male or female) who left on their underwear, and massages in rooms where lights were not dimmed. Admittedly, these clues to legitimate activity may not have been known to the detective?monitors at the outset of surveillance. However, these clues distinguishing legitimate and possibly illegitimate activity in the massage room should have been recognized by the detective-monitors as they conducted surveillance and the detective-monitors should have responded accordingly. The fact that, apparently, one male started with underwear on but had his underwear later removed does not excuse the greater number of surveilled and recorded innocent customers. 22. Strictly adhering to minimization requirements is essential because relative to wiretapping and bugging, video surveillance ?is even more invasive of privacy,just as a strip search is more invasive than a pat down search.?20 Video surveillance is a constant form of search that takes place over an extended period oftime, and for that reason, it often captures innocent behavior that is intended to be private.? 23.The Court ?nds that the search warrant does not contain required minimization guidelines, and that minimization techniques employed in this case did not satisfy constitutional requirements. Consequently, the court grants Defendant?s Motion to Suppress 9 and all evidence against Defendant obtained through and in connection with the search warrant is suppressed. 24. Immediately after Defendant left the Spa on January 19, 2019, and after video surveillance captured his image in real time, he was followed by a Jupiter Police Department of?cer who then noti?ed another of?cer to stop the car in which Defendant was a passenger. The stopping of?cer obtained the identi?cation of Defendant through the stop; Defendant?s identify was not known to law enforcement until he was stopped. Therefore, all information obtained through the stop is suppressed as the fruit of an unlawful search.22 Based on the foregoing, Defendant?s Motion to Suppress is granted and all evidence obtained against Defendant through and in connection with the search warrant is suppressed. Furthermore, all information obtained about Defendant as the result of the traf?c stop on July 19, 2019 is also suppressed. ORDERED at West Palm Beach, Florida, on this day of May 2019. LEONARD HANSER County Court Judge 1 The Court has been made aware that the State noile prossed Case No. on May 13, 2019 and the charge therein consolidated under Case No. This Order, to be clear, addresses each Motion in each case as originally filed. 2 The charge is identical in both cases. 3 The Court has viewed i_n camera all videotapes the parties stipulated the Court should view. 4 Defendant raises a number of other arguments but the Court finds Fourth Amendment concerns govern the Court?s ruling. 10 5 Rakas v. Illinois, 439 US. 128, 143 (1979) (internal citations omitted). 6 The Court notes section 877.26 of the Florida Statutes, recognizes a ?reasonable expectation of privacy? from commercial video surveillance in a dressing room, ?tting room, changing room, and restroom, situations analogous to this case. Fla. Stat. (2018). 7 154 So. 3d 292, 299 (Fla. 2014) (quoting United States v. Fields. 113 F.3d 313, 321 (2d Cir. 1997)). 8 1g. (quoting United States v. Pitts, 322 F.3d 449, 458-459 (7th Cir. 2003)). 9 The most useful Florida case this Court has found is State v. Butler, 1 So. 3d 242 (Fla. DCA 2009). In Butler, the trial court suppressed on Fourth Amendment grounds videotape surveillance of a mother in her child?s hospital room in West Virginia. The mother was suspected of harming her child (another child of the mother had died previously while living in Florida) due to experiencing Munchausen by proxy. Through state action, a video camera was hidden in the child?s hospital room and captured the mother appearing to attem pt to harm the child. The trial court suppressed the West Virginia hospital videotape when Florida prosecuted the mother for the death of her ?rst child but the appellate court reversed the trial court?s decision, finding the mother had no reasonable or legitimate expectation of privacy in her child's hospital room, and no Fourth Amendment protection, under the peculiar facts of the case. 10 Art. I, ?12, Fla. Const. Amison v. State, 5 So. 3d 798, 800 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009) (?Neither the trial court nor this court is bound by the rulings of lower federal courts?). 11 911 F.2d 1433 (10th Cir. 1990). 12 E- at 1437. 13 E- at 1436. 14 Mesa v. State, 77 So. 3d 218, 221 (Fla. 4th DCA 2011) (internal citations omitted) (quoting State v. Rabb, 920 So. 2d 1175, 1180 (Fla. 4th DCA 2006)). 15 911 F.2d at 1441. 15 Id. at 1445. 17 M- at 1441-1442. 18 While not a perfect analogy, the Court finds helpful the example of the strictures placed on law enforcement in implementing roadblocks. Both roadblocks and this case implicate Fourth Amendment rights. Roadblocks are warrantiess seizures and must be undertaken pursuant to a written plan embodying specific neutral criteria which limit the conduct of the individual officers. State v. Jones, 483 So. 2d 433, 438 (Fla. 1986). These guidelines detail the procedures of?cers are to follow at the roadblock and are intended to prevent the officers from acting with ?unbridled discretion.? In one Florida roadblock case, the appellate court found the absence of written guidelines fatally defective and suppressed all evidence obtained therefrom. Hartsfield v. State, 629 So. 2d 1020 (Fla. 4th DCA 1993). Avoiding of?cers acting with ?unbridled discretion? during video surveillance is one goal of minimization techniques. 19 This is an important distinction between this case and State v. Frahm, (Martin County, County Court, Kathleen H. Roberts, J., May 1, 2019). The Frahm order references ?Minimization Instructions? indicating there must have been written guidelines. Judge Roberts? order found those instructions were not 11 followed in executing the search warrant. 20 United States v. Torres, 751 F. 2d 875, 885 (7th Cir. 1984). 21 State v. Butler, 1 So. 3d 242, 250 (Fla. DCA 2009) (Padovano, J., dissenting). 22 Wonq Sun v. United States, 371 US. 471 (1963). Copies to: Jack A. Goldberger, Es . 250 S. Australian Ave, Ste 1400 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 William A. Burck Es . . Q3u1nn, Emanuel Urqu art Sullivan, LLP 1 001 Street NW Suite 900 Washington, DC 20005 Alexander Spiro, Esq. . 1111111, Emanuel, Urquhaa't Sullivan, LLP 5 Madison Avenue 22" Floor New York, NY 10010 L. Martin Reeder, Esq. Atherton McAuliffe Reeder PA 224 Datura St, Ste 815 West Palm Beach, FL 33401 Thomas LoCicero PL 915 Middle River Drive, Ste. 309 Fort Lauderdale, 33304 Shullman Fugate PLLC 2101 Vista Parkwa Suite 4006 West Palm Beach, 33411 Carol Jean LoCicero 601 South Boulevard Tampa, FL 33606 Judy Arco, ASA Elizabeth Neto, ASA Greg Kridos, ASA 12 AFFIDAVIT AND APPLICATION FOR SEARCH WARRANT AUTHORIZING THE MONITORING AND RECORDING OF VISUAL, CONDUCT . IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OFTHE FIFTEENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT, AND FOR PALM BEACH COUNTY FLORIDA I . THE STATE OF FLORIDA- COUNTY OF PALM BEACH BEFORE ME, Honorable Judoe.? HOWard Circuit Court JUng in and for Palm Beach .- I I pOrSOnaIIy appeared this day . . . IDetOctIivIIe Andrew Sharp, PoIicO Department bIOinIgI by ?rst dUIy and says that he and haO good reason to believe that .. II - a certain IpIrerInIiSOs IoIcatOdI BOOCIT CoUnty! Florida described as Ito wit:II II I ITITOI busmess locatOd at: II I I I 10I3I C2 Florida, IJUpiterI SquOre I TO rOaCh the prernlses: Begin at the intersection of Indiantown Road and Militaryr Trail. Travel east On Indiantown Road I pasSed the intersection of Ilndiantown Road and U. S. Highway1. Continue east on IlndiantOWn Road .. .. and the plIIazIIa' IS the ?rst entrance on the left of East IndiantOwnI Road. I buSlneIssI IS readily by: I . The Is located on the West Side of the plazIa Ond IfaceS InOrth. The entericrf building is painted tan in color. The is green in COior barrel tile. Suite C2 is a Isingle story unit. A Sign I I: . II - located In the front window of the buIsineSS identi?es the business and displays the Words ?Orchids of ASia Day Spa There are also neon Signs in the Window with the words and ?open?. .. . Two marked handicapped parking Spaces are dirOCtly in _front of the business. When facing the" '5 1 business, the front door is Situated to the right of: large multi- paned window. The front door is: -: 3I painted dOrkI In Color and IS of apparent IrInIeItaI Constructlon with large pane door Is hinged On the right and Opens to . I This IS a Complete Of the desired to be SeardTed aIOng with the Cudilage thI'erOOITc and - to diligently SeOrOh Said Ilo'catiOn and any Ond all persons who are reaISonably believed to be .I - invoIVOIdI' In the Crimes being the premises manned by or IundOIrI IthO ICIohItrOl of; . . Page'IoH?I FAA .I ?Hula ZhangIAiF, '1I2Ii3l6oj. I I ?And there is now being kept on the above described (premises) certain: .- Evidence of, Prostitution in addition to fruits 'of, and instrumentalities of violation of the Iawis) . __ass'ociated with Deriving Support from the Proceeds of Prostitution,? specifically the Non- -aIuIdioI, video recordings of individuals engaged in acts reIaIteId Ito these violationsLII' . . I [wash is being kept and used In violation of the laws of the State Of Florida to wit: Deriving Suppert from the Proceeds of Prostitution as enomerated under Florida State Statute 796. . which' is in violation of the laws of the State of Florida as enumerated In Chapter(s_) 796 cf the Florida see I I Statutes the facts establishing the grounds Ifor this application and the probable cause for believing that soon I - facts exist are as .fcIIoweII "7 In late October of 2018 I Initiated a prostitution Investigation based an information received from Detectives? . I -- with the Martin County Sheriff?s Off ce Detectives from the Martin County snaiirs Of?Ce advised they were working Several cases of prostitution and human traf?cking at Asian Massage Parlors In their county Daring .. A 5.5 the coarse of their investigation information was: gained that there was a __similar boslness in the Town of; i {LT-Jupiter The buSIness In Question was identif ed as Orchids oIIfAsiaI Day Spa, located at 103 UII. IS, Highway i; 1ISLiite C2 in the Jupitequuare Plaza -- . I I I I Based on the information obtained I began researching the business The State of Flonda Division of" I Corporations Records show the business registered as Orchids of Asia Dav Spa Inc.- and was fled and 'I-f became active on February151h 2012. The registered agent name is listed as Hua Zhang with an address the .business.I 103 S. U. S. Highway1 Jupiter. FL 33477.- A query of the Department of - Ii Safety and Motor Vehicles Driverand Vehicle InfOnnatIion Database identi?ed Hua Zhan?g with a date of birth -. '?75;s4787 December 1960 Zhang sI listed address of 52481 Evergreen Loop Winter Garden A AA Soogle searCh usrng the name of the business, Orohide of Asia Day Spa, revealed Several reviews of the 7 i business {on v'aridus search engines. Those reviews indicated the business was a ?rub and tug?; {rub and - i ?tug" is slang term which identities a business as providing sexual services speci?cally manually manipUIatIing - 31 the male genitais until the point of climax. The; Website IIRubrInIapsII. com Is a _foium based website which a 0ws .I 4 customers seemingly all male to discuss their individual experiences at illicit massage panors. Under the name Orchids cf Asia Day Spa several postings were located from FebiuIaryI 2015 Ito March of 2018 The-f reviews for Orchids of; Asia Day Spa provide the name address phone numbers and directions to the-4; 5 - locatIOn The postings detailed visits involving Asian females providing sexual acts as well as maSSageI?body I 'i-rubs In exchange for payment. The majority of the poets advised the female employee v?vouid provide the - A: male Client With a ?hand Job?; ?Thand _is a slang term for a sexual act Involving the manual manipuiation I - cf the male genitals Listed beIOvv are screen shots from rubmaps corn and various other forums describing [the nature of Orchids of Asia .. .. . . . . ., . 9J3 4 1 Iain.? law-m own slow-wk tam-mu [3mm bum-am am omwr rm*mm QWEDM [ad-m VPol-n i' sud-{3w 1 Man Iii-yon um um mm hvaln Ip?nyn 5mm min-haw? 43? I'll-slim Phat-hm dis-gem a. I I I I I ?Wanda-m5! pub-yaw . Ala-hang rip-mum. tummy MJMm?a-om Hanan-Mara Hawk-mm? m?ml-H?biwv?lim? wmnwurgna: Inm? Hupmuo's'?u. hum ?Maul-rd! . mwuu?mhum?tulfw1b9fhmun Duwmmaumluy ?Monmuwnu Hm MHIWI - ?3mm. nun-II navy-mu MW - . .pmm. wawkumM-Hn . .. Imagmd?? ankydeleaqan-aamu! Int: Mamba Intulu amrrmuwmw?m? -.-..- - - Jam- BM ?hum-mm :1me Autumn-u Bud-um Inmumt Um 1km 9mm Pm?mwm . . . - - . - .- .. . - . . . . . I1. I I . .. .. _tmaqw?wm: I: Miriam realm? ?mI_ I -. I: I mama-mum . - - I?hm?l?hrhi?huuaumwlb nun-Mmuvmumc If Wamrm ?sanitation-mum.? Hmumummnm .?uf?wlh?h?lpbgoI MoguIMudoM f-g' it: . - - -I wmnmuInouqmn-[MEMI ?Mil? I I I ?any" . -. -. - wannaReviews of Orchids of Asia Day Spa posted to h?g: usasexgmde nlr?forum/shommead ghg97448- assgge-Pamr-Regg?g on OctobeIr I18"-h Ia'nd OIcItIobeIr IPage'SOf?I?l (-500 . wmmgawmm '?mmwm?eiggiu mg- I ?i lanai-5' In uS-umuum.m 'mawmtmu mun?f:- m} Billie-op nil: ?rmwi fw?wumnamM?mMommMM-m camhuh:- mm a: hmi?i??hnrm . Elwin-um, . mar-mum . aga-nth I cum rII-Ile IM new w: ilwm hum. WWII: In 1 1mm mm a mums-4' .n 5 I Mug-v numb I '90 - mm: - ?muIngnwanmqm uranium-MI. mwlmuwnnyumwm wquIith?MI-uu?o was? Pit-v? In - Jungian-nth? WM nunmmunMIH?-uinhlj?ll .myimtm__ .. . . mum). - mini-lumiuil ill-Hindi.? ?it 'hhr'??hn?un'l?g '-Reviewe <5f Orchids <5f Asle Dey Sp?e peeled t<5 hftpe rubmaps lubiter-fl? 9451 March 2018 On Tuesday, November 285 8, I begeh a surveillance epeletlen <5f the busmess I conducted a visual: inepeetien of the exterlor of the business-I and ebsewed heon sIIgIn with the Words "Massages" ?Open? and F?Faclels?? Listed next to {he sign In whrle vinyl lettering were the words ?Massage Therapy, aTable Shower? ?Body Treatments and "Faelal Treatments? Oh the front deer or the buslness. In white vinyl letfehng, the epera?ng times <5f the husmees were displayed which Stated the business epeh days a Pageehf 51: 3 . 3 vveekIfIroniI09:30am to 9.80pm. After being at the bLIinness Ifsrover ?hrs, I onIonbseIrved male clients enter. - I I and exit the business despite the listing advertising "Facials? and other services for female Clients. From i . Tuesday. November 2018 to Wednesday, November 2018, covert video surveillance from the -- . outside of the business was conducted 24hrs a day Each day, the business opened at. approximately 9am II and did not close until approximately 10 30 or 11 :30pm. Each client who entered the basiness was male '_33 arid wouIId s'ItIay of an average of 30-45 rInImIJtes. The Surveillance log for those days Is as follows: Surveiilance began on Tuesday, November 2018 at 1500hrsI to 21 57hrs. During the sorveiliance penod, I approxrmately 7 males visited the business. AII of the males stayed fora period 013010 60 minutes, I II On Wednesday. November 2018 I conducted surveillance of the business from 0900hrs to 2300hrs - During the Surveillance appioxima'telv sixteen maIes the business All of the males stayed fore - a period of 30 to 60 minutes - . . . . . . . . . . on Thursday. November8ih, 2018, Isonduct?d suweillance at the business from 0800hrsto 2300hrs During - the surveillance pen?od, approximately eighteen (18) males visited the busiInessII including a golf cart natty or eight inales AII oftheI ImI'aIIes stayed IroIr a period ofI I30 to. 80. minutes Fnday, Novernber 9i?, 2018, condUCted Surveillance at the business from 890058 to 2230hrs. During - II. the" surveillance period apprOXImater eighteen males visited the business and stayed for a period of Iiso I8 so minutes si 30 Its 60 minutes 0n Senday, NovemberI 2018, I sonducted Surveillance at the business from 0800hrs to 2200hrs. Dui1ng 3 Saturday, November 1083 2018 I condusted sit the busmess fibrn 0900hrs to 2300hrs. 3 "During the survelliance peridd,approx1matelytwenty (20) males visited the busmess iaIrIId IIsIteyed fora period. I- . - the surveillance period, approxrrnateiy thirteen rInaieIs visited the husInIessI and Stayed toIIr a period 0130 . -II. . '3 to I60 mInutes On Monday, November 1 28 2018, I conducted surveillance at the bLisiIness front 0900hrs to 2300hrs. During the Surveillanse penod,approx1metely twelve Visited the business and stayed for a of 30 Its 60 minutes 3 I-Afterobtaining this Information I made contaIctIIwitIhI Fionde Department of Heaith Investigator Karen Herzog II-Ierzog conducted her inspection Inside the business, HeIzog advised there were three female employees: I. 3 II -3pIresehIt. Herzog took photographs of the employees Florida Driver?s LIcenses and Message Therapy?? 3 "Licensee The females Were identi?ed as the following Lei Wang (NF, osrzorrs) Hue CeotAfF ozrosnziti-?i' 3 I '-end Sheri Mingbi 07i19I/60) Investigator Herzog teck photographs of the Inside of the business and . 3 riadviseId it appeared as though the tense employees Were living there as there were two rooms with Ibeds 3 33 I insiuding sheets IIendI- II-piliovvs. Next to the beds ehe located dressers which housed several personal items -I e_3I 3 I 'i of the business sondusting her Inspectron Detective Cock #404 Detective Jordan #405 and were sinside ;3 -. 3'2 . of the bustness :to the front and tear in Unmarked vehicles At the conslt'I'sion of the inSpeCtIOI?i, Detective 3' 3 I 3 Jordan #405 advised an Asian female Immediately exited the rear of the business end through awayII a sniaIIlI - I3 plastic into the trash dumpster located behInd the busmess 3- '33?3?33 Page 50f11 A?t'epproxlmeteiy 2300hre oh the Detective Jorden'end I conducted a trash puii on the business. Located inside ofgthe' dumpster to the business, I observed several white. garbage bags. BaSed on my training and experience, it is known theSe types of Asianiliicit.maesagebueinees discard their trash inside smell piastle groceryetyiebege. Next to several reguiar'white garbage bags, leceted small white?grocery- .etyie plastic bag. Insideof the white bag, I located Jim-other smell grey grocery/style begs. Inside of the ?rst greyfgrecery style bag,"l located several pieces or white paper Which had beeh'npped. I pieced the pieces a Spreadsheet with sexierai Columns. The columns weregtitled'N?ame. Service'jAdd Time, Amount. In.'0ut. Gash, Card, Card tip and other. Under the names column-wee the name LulueL'qu Was listed on mbmapsmm astute of the Illicit massage. A180 'Idceted Ihslde ofthe bag plastic napkins Which were we and appeared tobe eevered In seminai ?uid- ?The: items-refers and taken Depamment. Thursday. November requested Crime Scene InVesti?getdr-Mcclehden conducts: presumptive test of the napkins recovered forthe presenCe: of Seminal MeCIe'ndon stated the hapk?ine' tested positive. OnMenday, Nevembem Rhodes #1343 and] thdelcted a seemed trash pull on the'bueiness- located two small grocery style piae?c bags Inside the-dampster to "the The?ret, a email ten grocery? stifle plastic bag contained several credit. card receipts-with the ?ame of the bueinese printed oni?te? top. Within the bad were several wet-paperhapkins which appeared to be coveredin seminaI Second ,bag, In ceior smelt eehteihed severei other wet paper ineipkirierdiohgjwith.?ripped pieces of white: ?paper. Handw?tfeh' eh'the' paper-waged. Lulu. :Ihr', De?end Ihrpa'rerit'heeie the humbei?e 0.82.8. believedtobethe laS't fourdigits. of a credit card .hgmber. The-items Were secured. and taken back it? theJuniter Polite- Department Idesdem member 201.8, . requested [Bethe Scene: investigator MeC-iehdon edhduct' a presumptive teet of "the napkins .reemrered for the ?uid. Investigater Me.CIendon Stated the napkins tested poeifive. On Thuredam January 2019. surveilieneewa'e coeducted at the bueiness'to monitor Customer volume 's'an'd traf?c. Le meme. Serveilien'ce-begah - 511 29hre black Ford Escape with 'a 'iNe?w Yerk tag pulls .:ir?o Ithe__ parking Jet. and parks near the. business. wearinge black Windbreaker reg reeh shorts and tan": viSor?en?te re the business- (Subject Ate i-fSubjeefA?? egritsithe business and was by" Of?cer Kitchens-#331 and a. traf?Q-?stop Was Initiated fer-a vitilatien of at'raf?c :eo?troi?eviee. ji'edn'ducted -a roadside; .ihtl?ewiew with Subject Aseeheeming hie activity inside the Was advisedef'the folldWi?hg: He stated a friend had referred himto Subjeem advised been. to; several times prequusly. Subje?Q't'A Estateq When he entered the business, he :was ineffey?f??bhy whereihezweitedfdt- eh e'rhpieyee. He advised he was greeted by- an??ien identi?ed as asked fer-e heifheur massage and a roem where, hegidiisrebedehdiaid face downer) a massage table-inside the hath. Stibject A advised 'he received a 'maeelagej_and when he turned Lever: "Ava? manually etimuldtedhis No de?cient-was usedi'Subjeet rat Page 16'of '11 an. 7- - - cleaned him off using a hot towel and he was branded with napkins. CI showed subject A a photograph of Lei Wang who he identi?ed as ?LuLu?. Subject A advised ?Law" was Individual he paid for the massage. I also showed subject A a photograph of Hua Can a known employee of the - spa, who he identi?ed as ?Avaf?. Subject AC advised he gave ?Ava? $70. 00C for the Services performed. . . 1300 Cf?C?Subject arrives the business driving a thCItCe HyundaI Genesis . . 1C33Ohrs _?Subject skits the business and was by Off? oer Kitchens #381 and a traffic stop was initiated for unlawful speed._ and was assorted to a massage room. Subject stated Conee inside the room he CdisCrobed and laid face dawn on a massage table; Subject advised he reoeived a massage and when he turned over the female manually stimulated his penis to climax. No cendom was used. SubjCecI advised at the cancIuSIo'n, _the female cleaned him off. using a' hot and he was provrded with napkins with he ?nished cleanmg himself off. Subject BC stated he gave the female $20 OI) _caSh for the . g1 serwcesprowded . .. . . 'C3-1445hrs "Subject arnves the busmess 'a thte Mercedes Benz SUV .C C1500hrs "Subject arnved Cat the busIness a four door Honda - 154C5hrCs ?subjeet exits business and was followed 0ft" oer Palladino #362 CCaCnd a traf?cC stop - . (was initiated forC' violation of a traffic control devise. I oonducted a roadside Interview with Subject concerning his activity inside the business, and was advised of the He stated he had just . to the area and saw the business and had been there one time previously Subject stated When he entered the busmess he was greeted ?by an Asian female Subject stated he (raked for an . Page 70f11 I conducted a roadside Interview with Subject concerning his aetIvIIyC Inside business, and was advised of the following: He stated a friend. had referred hIm to the bdsineSs and he had - - frequented the business several times before. Subject stated when he entered the business he C. was in a foyerllobbyC where he waited for an employee. He advised he was greeted by an Asian Female and he asked fer a half hour massage. Subject advised he paid $59. 00 for the massage - Subject advised he was escorted to: a Inassage team where he entered and dlsrobed Subject CC - advised he lied down (In the massage table face down and a different female, Che identified as ?Ava? - gave him. the massage and when he turned over on his bask, the female manually stimulated his -. penis to climax No condom was used. SLIijCedt advised at the ooncltiSion, the female provided - .- - him with a hot toWel along with napkins to (lean Off With. I showed subject a photograph _of Hua Cao and he advised he believed she was 1. also showed him a photograph of Lei. wang and 3 The adVIsed he behaved hen to be the female he paid Cat the front of the business . . . . - - _CSubjeoI D: eXIted busmess and was followed Cb} Off?cer KItchens #381 where _a traf?cCC. ?stop was initiated for a red light, I pondueted a roadside interview. with. subject who - advised the followmg when he entered the buSIneCsCs' he was in a foyerllobby where. he waited an employee He advised when he entered the plaza; he parked next to a __white Mercedes With I. 3 maroon roof. Subjeet I) advised an Asian female exited the Vehicle and entered the business song; Cwith- hirnC Inside" the bustne?s's, CSUbject stated the same female asked hImC_ if he wanted 1_ hour and . i - he advrsed he did and stated he paid $79 via ((edit card Subject stated he Chad visited the" business -- -- 91- II room Once inside the room he ?disrobed and laid IfacIIe down on a massage table. Subject advised a different female from the initial female gave him a massage and when he tumed over the female?. manually stimulated his penis to climax. No condom was used. Subject advised at the conclusion, I the female provided him with a hot tovIvei to clean off with. [Showed Subject a photograph of Lei . . .?Wang and he identi?ed her as the female driIvinIgI the White Mercedes and Is'tetIeIdI she Was the _IsIaIIme I II I 'II-femaie he paid today; end on his previous visit, I 5 Boring the surveillance operation, Lei WengI Was seen acting the business and entenng a white Mercedes . II I I ?Benz convertible With a maroon top bearing The vehicle left the plaza and was ?surveilied as . .I it traveled North on U. S. Highway .1 to knoWn plaza in Martin ()0an where another illicit Asian Message I . - Is located. exrted her vehicle and made contact With an unidentit?ed white mate.I - - .. . .. Based on the above described information, tneIIreI is probable cause to believe Lei Wang IdiId reasonably I believe or know another person Wes engaged in prostitution and Lei Wang did live or derive support or .I maintenance in whole or in part from what was believed to be the eamings or proceeds of such person' prostitution contrary to IFloriIdeI' Statute 796 05(1) and . Based on the surveillance, a review (it subpoenaed documents other Investigative methods and your 5? -- I I ef?ants experience in inVestIgeting similar Illicit spa/massage parlor businesses; your a?ient believes the II Orthids of Asia Dev Spa Iiocated at 103 SI U. tiighWay 1 Unit#02. Jupiter.? is operated using a stenderd :iI . ans-gran Massage Peder model The ovemhelmingly (If not male _CuStOrrIIer clientele enter . - business for a flat fee Which goes directly to the business The male customers then negotiete a fee Ior price Ej 'thh the female providing the. service (Sexuai act)! The money bIroILIght intoI the business through cash and II .. I cred itIfdebit card transaICtions Is then deposited into" a boslness account In the name "of _OrIChIids of Asia. This, investigation has taken piece over a signi?cant period Iof time; Surveillance along With other investigative 1? II - means has shown that this pattern of Icriminai conduct is ongoing and not isolated to a speci?c employee 1II'dayoftheweek-.organizetions. The totality Iof circumstances. regarding the Statements of customers the volume of male IFurther-I aft" ant IIhes specualized training and experience in the Investigation of proetitution. shOrt ItermI trains. and information gathered on the business through investigative I I'Ii?techniques as well as an analyse or banking and finanCIal records lead your effiant- to believe that a . organizetien is being run out of the Orchids Day Spa business SI U. Highway 1 - I'Juplter,_ County (It Palm Beach State or Florida; . - - II :The foilowmg Investigative methods Which are commonly utilized during ?the investigation IoIf various I. criminal oases have either been tried and not Succeeded in achievlng the goats of the investigation, are too-If - - 135 dangerous ??1533. Jeopardlze the investigation it employed or are applicable in this particular - - I Investigation II: . times In investigations involving massage parlors law enforcement agencies will employ the i- I:_j - use tindercover of?cers .or Con?dential Informants These undercover officers or Infonnants will enter. the} -. I In busmess (While being monitored and many. .tirnes recorded) and attempt to negotiate for a sex est ln' II exchange for an amount or US Currency This investigative technique' Is problematic for IsIIeVerai reasons. Often times. the Women performing the (sexual) :act are not. to speak or negotiateII . 5.3 I specrficaliy for a sex act: Secondly; if the Woman performing the massage is to dissuss a specific . sex act it may not occur until the customer is in a State of almost complete undress This is a .s'uIb'Istantiel; - I II I safety concern ?tor any effects working undercover Igoi'I informants being utilized Finally. due to the stated)? I II Pagasofit I II concerns-above. often times the undercover of?cer or informant wilt haveto ai'low'the woman performing the massage to touch his genitals in order to the. act in order for ai'orime to occur. Again" . thisis tremendously problematic as itlrequires the undercover officer or informant to he himself commits crime to further-the investigation. A crime: none the less that is at the crux of the investigation. This. is a concem ethically for both the. particular of?cer involved as well as: his lawifenfomement agency of - employment. 3 -3 3 3 3 3.?interviewing current or past employees ofa business or?organizetion lea tactic often used to further' - - an investigation. in'investigating As?ifahiLatln Massage parlors he has . discovered that?many of th?e'meen working there can be in the United States illegally or in a temporary -stat'us.'_ in prostitution at theSe massage parlorsispas . as 3a. means to support . . themselvesand their families. Thus, thesevgirts are usually/"not interestedin speaking with or. cooperating . _3 with law' enforcement for they fear. status issues. and/or a loss of income, 'Addltifonaliy, women working at- Asian massage parlors may also engage in prostitution as artisans .to rep-ave debt for transportation to the UnitedStates or to protect themselves andior their families from abuse. Thus, they are very reluctant. to speak with. law enforcement out offear and often times will be untruthfuiif'lntervieitved. Therefore intendewingjwomen who?a're'or have Worked at. the business and __obteining truthful Statements from them 3 is an exceedingly dif?CUIt taskttin addition, Should the Women 'not wish tolcooperete; the investigation could be expoSed and the ownersnnanagers of the massage periorjmay beCQmeevvarefof our investigation, . . a "sneak'and is needed to identify-end arrest subjects involved 3 '3 3 3 in prostitutionfasjt relates to the-Deriving of Funds from_the proceeds of Prostitution occurring at and due - . to the Orchids of :A'sia Day spa located .at3103 S. Florida,_Whlie probable? to believe prostitution is occurring inside thebusiness? at :1 03 8.. U.S.. ?Highway 1 your. af?an't and anyfeliow officers are unable to d'irecitylobserve theleaid 'act oflprostitutioni which provides'the - neceesa ryelern'e'nt to [the charge of deriving funds from the proceeds of prostitution without the assistance . of eOVert visual,.noneaudio surveillanceAdditionally,- the fewest this investigation is notonly thecustomers committing prostitution-but. more importantly these'invowed in derivingiiu ndls'frorin'the proceeds-cf the owne?r(s) 'andior managers) of ?earnestness and peasib'iy any? of the?woman'workmaiat the?business. Your af?ant 3- bel?ieves that a "sneekand peek." warrant isthe bestland onlyWaylaw-enforoement can eonciusiveiy say 3 3 3 prostitution the statements or customers exiting the . -3 business[isseppenive-to this argument, his not enough. in and. Of itsetf, to establish the predicate Crime 3 .cf preemption. which; ls'reqmred to charge from the proceeds of whil'e'the previous enstome'r statementsiand Surveillance do tend suppert to the belief that probable cause - exists is sappose that peeiitution is seeming inside me itd'oeenritaiiow for a furtherance of; L- an inveetigation regarding thefderivin'g funds from the proceeds of our case, is the oniyioptlon to Obtain de?nite evidenoeiof prostitution occurring inside the?b'ti'slnesstfofurtheriou'r investigationFurther. in;:requesting the issuance of this ?sneak and neek"3.warrentyour .afiiants have strengiy' - considered the 1990 {1 pi? 'C-irctiit Co art. of Appeals; decisiO'n'ULS, MesagRincon; 91 _1 F. 2d 1433(10?? .Cir'. 3 - X1990.) Whicnaddressedthe parameters weeding WhatTWaStiisn Teer?l'lssarches in the . decisioniithe. co't'th Speci?cally addreesed Silent; video-only. surveillance. .in. the; .eontextof electronic interceptionorvrsuar Images; Which Is not regulated federalisttatuteglthe' 'g'e'urts have devised some; - safeguards byenalo?gvto those relquihedbv Titlelli; buttheyhave not necessarily-adopted thoseTitie . . requirem?mts' the't do. more than implement constitutionalrequirements. United States v. Blasticcii, .3 rage-90m . 786 F.2d at 510; United States Torres 751 F. 2d at 584-85 US Falls 34 F. _3d 674 (8th Kommeiian 970 F. 2d 536 (93? Cir.1992}. Based on the information provided above. youraff ant beIIeves' . that all guidelines have been met through this Investrgation See also US Batiste 2007 U. 8. Diet, . LEXIS 611851 Upon issuance of the ?sneak and peek" Wanant, covert surveiliance Cameras Will only be placed in i .53_ locations where prostItution is believed to be cocuning. In addition the frent lobby of the business Will also - - be under Surveillance as this Is where the exChange or money Is believed to be ?occurring.- There Will f' no cameras installed in areas expected to be non-criminai in nature kitchen. bathroom personal . ._bedrooms Additronaily, the view of the video monitor will be situated In the monitoring room Such that the . . view IS not observable by persons other. than those persons monrtorrng the view in the proper performance - of the monitors of?cial duty The viSuaI non~audro surveillance Will be monitored _d'uring ?peek hoors'f of the; . -- .. business detennrned during other surveillance Your attiant Detective Ahdrew N. Sharp, is a swom Police Of?cer for the eprter Police Department Jupiter Palm Beach County Florida since February 2007. Your a?r ant received an Associate of Arts Degree . 'i In Criminal Justice {torn Indian River State College in May 2005. Your af?ant Is _a gradUate of the Indian River hundred (300) hours of oontrnurng iaW enforcement training; Including but not limited Speed Measurement Narcotics Dangerous Dreg Identi?ca?on,- Intervlews Interrogations .. - ibnrninal Investigators Seminar1 The Reid Technique lnvestrgatrve lntervrewrng Advanced Interrogation to InvestIgatIons Criminal Investigations Body Language 8t Deceptron Drug Crimes Street Gangs: OvervIew Introduction to Clandestrne'f"; 1 Laboratory investIgatrons Advanced Undercover Techniciues and Command and. Control:-* Overview, introduction to HighWay and Rural Drug investigations; The Art of Surverliance The Undercovergzj I. I .1Df?oer, IntervleWs and Interrogations In High Risk Environments it? Training Off oer land a member of the Strategic Response Team. From February 2007 Your eff ant. 'i'responded to and conducted preliminary investigations on a variety of calls fer service and Wes primarily - During the tirne your aft? ant has been a Police Of?cer be has been as a Road Patrol Off'cer I i7? 5"aseigned to our town 3 high crime areas. Since July 2016 your aff ant has been seeigned to the Jupiter. Department?s Investigations DIvIsron. as a Detective.- From the commencement of the] 1' assignments to present youra?ianthas personally participated Inthernvestigatlone ofperson crimes, sexual 3' - - if crimes, robbery, and burglary In which Such investigations has resulted In arrests or exceptional clearances "Your eff ant has been involved with the executIon of numerous search warrants - . .. . - - Yotrr aft" ant to empowered by S. S.- 9.43 to conduct Investigations and make arrests for vroiatrons or - .. "Chapter 796 related to ProstItutron Your aft" ant Is a duly sWorn law entercement off cer within the meaning of F. S. S. 934. 02 (6) and is empowered to make arrests for the offences enumerated In .S 934 07 int. lglpartlculer, the offenses deeilng In narcotics and dangerous as well as prostrtutron money Iaundenng. .1 . and Organized crime; Your affia'n't 13 currently forthe Investigation detailed herein, Whicrr Is being ,j .. - i?j-icarried on in an organrzed manner and In aid to Which Investigatron this application Is made; . I 5 electronic vrdeo survelliance of the interior location Of the Iocattbn? to identify participants in the criminal If commonly referred to as a "sneak and peek" There shail be no capabilrty on any of the Installed . Your af?ant WiSh to so enter the described location for the purpose of covertly conducting this wanant in the daytime or the nIghttime or on Sunday, to Install monitor and perform if: Page'i?of11 maintenance on, electronic video Surveillance on the said premises herein before speoi?ed. Once monitoring I of the subject premises begins, your af?antWill Continue monitoring for no more than ?ve-days withoutfurther I - order of this oourt._ The warrant shall be tenninated or renewed based. upon the evidence gleaned from the- surveillance. Due to the propertylocetion and the covert nature of theorimlnal enterprise, no other,- less intrusive investigatory means employed thus far have been s'uooessful, nor are that likely tobe in the future. - Upon tenninetidn of this order YoerAf?ant shall forthwith make return ot his doings within tendays from the? . date thereof. Upon tenninatio'n of the conditions'justifying the need for oo'vertness, notloe'o?flthe sorreptitiou's search will be 'given'within seven days to the responsible person(s) of thle'loea'tion to'lbe Searched. . 3' BASED on vo'uneimm knowledge; training and emerges,- there-lsiprObable' ??use to believe that: the bosiness Ideated at 103 S, 1. Unit #02, Jupiter, _S'tate of Florida, i . I is being utilized to operate aprostitution organization andlor derive support from the proceeds of prostitution. BASED ON all the foregoing inferrnati'on, your?Af?ant also has probable pauselto believe that a violation of I 1' . the laWs ofth'e State of Florida, to-wit: Chapter 796, Florida State Statutes, exists in the premises addressed 'et103IS. Highway 1, Unit Jupiter, Palm Beach Ceunty! Stateiof Floridagf - . II: WHEREOF, af?ent?rnaltes this affidavit-and prays theflsisuanoe of 'a 'searoh' warrant in due form of. law for . I 'jthe eurreptitious installation of video monitoring equipment within the above described (premises) tor the - .- 5 .said property, heretofore described; and for therno'niton'ng and recording 'of visUal non-audio conduct and Jurisdiotion?over the offense, by the duly constitutedlof?cers of the levv. . .kgp'MiLino} I. Detect eAndrew Sharp'nie?izr?lmt . - .safe keeping of the property, subject? to the order of this Honourable court or'su'ch' other Court having 1- . 15mm and?subs??bed before mt ?its :1 gatesijof [the Fifteenth; - 'ftg'f? - inandIfor-Ealm-Beaeh County. 5 EAR CH ARRANTAUTHORIZING RECORDING 0F VISUAL NON-AUDIO GDMIUCT IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE. I IUDIC-IAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR PALM BEACH GOUNTY FLORIDA THE STATEQHILQRIDA . COUNTY 90F PALMBBAGH TIIBNAMB mains-IE OR-FLORIDA, ALL AND SINGULAR Tha- Shefi? tifl?alm Beaah Chants, Ha??a, and his IanuI Depu? as, Ali PUIi'se- Of?cais in Beheh County, Florida, The Gammissionar efthe Honda Bureau. aflawi Enforcement or any of his DuIyCanstitutedAgahts ta-W1t Dataadse 'af'the Jupiter Relics Department; WHEREAS complaint tiIi eat-h anti In W?ng, supported by af?davit at hrsdihia- Witness tit- WIt?ueasas, IOrWit: De'teativa Andreas-thaw; lashes. Paitm-Depamnant, has this day been made Hanorebta HOWARI) EGATES Circuit ?aunt Judge: in anti for Palmi?aach Canary; El'o?da WHEREAS said facts made Imam to; ma and somidarad by me have caused me te certi?r and ?nti Ilia: faata sat forth saiti af?davit shoW and. ma?hita ptahahia sausafar the issuanca tit-this Warrants and the Comhemg satis?ad at? the- estatensa; afsaid graumis set faith in tha- af?davit and that the IaWs (if the State ofFleIida have haan tar aria lasing Violatsd 1311' at in a bastion- It?tii?m and nasal-mad as. follows. The Witness Insert-A at: I . 103- S. RSI-Highway Shite?iimpifss Bla?tiai 9T0 reach {11%er _'Begin at-r the intersectian (if Road and Military Trail. Travel ?2an an Indianttiwn Road {hr 1311111? passed the intersection afIn?iantemI Re'a'fi and HS mummy 1. Continua has: an Indten?town Road anti tha Plaza is the first; entrance an the. right of; Easi Indiantown Rand, husiaassis raa'dilysreeognmadha; Thti business is located PII the Tar wastsi?e a?f- the plaza and :faces north The exteritir (if the building it pamtad tan in solar T116 mafia green iti- solar harm] tile.- SuiteCZis ii. single story unit; A Sign heated in the Rent Window tif the husmessmen??as Ilia business "and Elissa displays illa Words ?Orchids. of Asia Day Spa-I. There are also neat! signs in thawilldetv with the; words ?Massage? and ?Open? '1th marked handicapped parlang spaces are from: Inf the business. When iaamg the business, the ?oat. door- Is Situated in the right of large intuit-pallets WmdaW The, front door is painters dark banners" at eolnr- and is of apparent metal enlist: action with larga glass pane Whlans. The slams hinged on the right (Wear) and spells out (left to right) This 1's- a template ?fths husmess ?esire? to his searched along. with the curtllage tile?le'af and to search said In nation and any and all fauna therein, when are masoaabiy behaved to bat let-valved la the. crane Io: militias, lasing-tile prismises occupied bystander this central of?: Hus Zhang. (M, 5 And than is :1th assailant-on the sham smashed (premises) cerfam Evidence .?of Prostitution in; .addiilort to: frit'?a of; and af vltl'la?m'l of tile laW(s) associated with. Deriving frbin' ihhl?receeds of Prostitutl?n spacif?cally ills amen resortlillgs engaged 111 lists relatatf ?t these violations Whidh is being? kept and 1183(1'111 sisiahsn ?fth-slants ail-tile stats cameraman Wit:- Derriymg 31111116111 from the at prps?tutiall as enumerates undel- Florida State-I Statute. 796-. Whi?h Is in. violation of tile, laws Ufilia State .5651? Flar'i?a, as enumerated Chapter 3796 ?fths leiaa State Stamtes ran, a any Ef?cm-nfiha-?upiwr Fillies sameness heresy- amended assass- antillecessary assistants; ill the name attire State sf Marisa, it: surreptitinusly enter "the aesm?hec?l measles far-ills plasmas} similarity scintillating visual, nan?Ialltiitl of the interior the loaatisn ts identi?tparticlpallts lihyolved' tn the criminal enterprise Tilers shall he no capability all any of the. installed equipment to allth auliin - monitoring or The: he malls Within teal {lays aflssuanca hf this warrant- in - thin daytime or: the nighttime; all all Susaayi to install similar and perform maintenance an decimals vide'a all the. said premises herein balms specials-a Qilbe mealtarmg oftlle Suhgect begins-.- 2111th will militants Instructing for. as more than ?va days .witllaat farther aid as militia snarl The: warrant shaiI be termlnated at renewed Basal natal file gleaned from the smaslliIancs; Data in ?the property location and tile naveri hamlet 0f tilts mam eatemrfisa, no other. less lnttaslve illVestlgatety means employed liars farhave been susehssfal nor. am ?that likely it}. he lti the ?11m Up on termina?pll of?lls ordai- you are to -- Hw? a. make rattan efyour doings spun executing Ibis Warrant, which yau are hereby eemmanda? to execute as thelaw directs un?nn ten days Item the date mat-eat Upon issuance afth'e ?nasal: and pant? warrant; assert. yideh surveillance cameras Will he placed- Italy 111 locahcns where prcs?m?un 1s believed to be yawning. In addition, the hunt lobby of the .husihess will aim be. under surveillance as this 13 Where the enchange of money is believed to be oceumng There Will. be an cameras installed' In areas .?ezgaucted Ia be nun-c?rmal nature 1. e. 1 kitchen, hu?uuom, persanal .hedreams Addluunally, the new. of the Wdee monitor be situated in the menitonhg' roan: sue}: that the.- aims Is nut- ehservahle by persons the?r than these persons Ihe IneW; In the proper cfthia manner" s. nf?aial any. The visual nua- audio meillance W111 be monitored (Inning. the busmess huurs of operaticn Which has been anemnned tliapugh print- surveillanae as. Upan termination ?fths sentiment: Jusuntmg the. mead for eaverhaesa, noting cf the sunep?truus search will In: given Within sewn days In the rasphnathle penance) at the location to he searehen. You are hereby In Ilia event. that yup seize any of the said prepertyher?ein baihre .ds'se??b ed to: make up at the. Inns anti place ufsenaure .s: Ihll trua- and, Itemized list and inventory stall ?ung: seized and taken, In duplicate signed by you, and to than anti there give and ?shnet- the said dapheate copy Iherecfet?the parser: hon: Wham 13933333103131?1311 be. What If tahan .?nm the hf anytine: together With a. duplluate copy of??us WWI, and If not taken from the of anyone, then In any persga in charge nf said (premises), and In the absence 0f my use}: pexsen, ta lease the sepia an or In the (premises) directs that the. Af?ne: keep the origmaI A?dawt and Apphcatlun an support of {his Search Warrant; In the custody- uf- the. enemi?hg, agency until further Grits: nftha Cuurt er until by the executing. agency. The of this Warrant, tege?ter With the an gtnal inventary, shall he; returned en?i than With the can: at. the Court as stated any: Walnut: ten days the issuanee nfthis Wanna. Panther amy 'prepefty seized er taken Shall be impounded for use as stridenue. ?at any trial of any animator penal cause growing nut ufths having mpossessxun ofseld ppepet?'g: fi-SS myhan?d: an: seal this 15?111 nay of? anI?y, 201a. .Hencrabl H0: ARI). GO 3 aftha. Fifteenth Judicial . =Cireuit In and fur Palm Beach Gaunt-y