## Facts

- Kurt Alan Stand was recruited in the early 1970s as an agent of East Germany’s foreign intelligence service and later maintained clandestine intelligence contacts after the Cold War.
- Stand and his wife, Theresa Marie Squillacote, engaged in covert meetings with foreign intelligence officers abroad, used coded communications, and pursued U.S. government positions providing access to sensitive material.
- The government’s proof relied heavily on FISA-authorized electronic surveillance and physical searches, undercover interactions with an FBI agent posing as a foreign intelligence officer, and documents alleged to be connected with the national defense.
- A jury could find that the defendants agreed with foreign intelligence agents to transmit national defense information and took substantial steps toward doing so.
- After a jury trial in the Eastern District of Virginia, Stand and Squillacote were convicted of conspiracy to transmit national defense information, attempt to transmit national defense information, and obtaining national defense documents; Squillacote was also convicted of making false statements.
- Squillacote was sentenced to 262 months’ imprisonment and supervised release; Stand received a substantial prison term.

## Issues

1. Whether FISA surveillance and physical searches were lawful and whether the district court had to disclose FISA applications and orders to the defense.
2. Whether the jury instructions defining “connected with” or “relating to” the national defense under 18 U.S.C. §§ 793 and 794 were unconstitutionally vague or overbroad, or improperly untethered from formal classification.
3. Whether the government’s alleged derivative use of information connected to Squillacote’s psychotherapist communications required suppression or reversal.
4. Whether the evidence was sufficient to prove the charged espionage offenses, including the existence of national defense information and the required intent.

## Decision

- The Fourth Circuit affirmed all convictions and sentences.
- The court upheld the legality of the FISA surveillance and searches and held the district court did not err in resolving legality through ex parte, in camera review without disclosure to the defense.
- The court approved the district court’s “national defense” instructions, rejecting vagueness and rejecting any rule limiting §§ 793 and 794 to formally classified materials.
- The court rejected the psychotherapist-privilege claim, concluding the privileged communications were not admitted and any challenged derivative use did not warrant reversal on this record.
- The court held the evidence was sufficient for a rational jury to find guilt beyond a reasonable doubt on the espionage-related counts.

## Legal Principles

- Under FISA, district courts may determine the legality of surveillance and searches through ex parte, in camera review; disclosure to the defense is required only if necessary to decide legality.
- For 18 U.S.C. §§ 793 and 794, “national defense” is a broad concept covering closely held information whose disclosure could potentially harm U.S. national security; it is not limited to documents bearing formal classification markings.
- A psychotherapist–patient privilege does not automatically require reversal based on alleged derivative use where privileged communications are not introduced at trial and the remaining evidence independently supports the verdict.
- Sufficiency review asks whether any rational trier of fact could find each element beyond a reasonable doubt, viewing evidence in the light most favorable to the government.

## Conclusion

The Fourth Circuit affirmed espionage-related convictions, holding that FISA secrecy procedures were properly applied, the “national defense” element under §§ 793 and 794 was correctly instructed as closely held, potentially harmful security information, alleged privilege-based derivative-use error did not justify reversal, and the evidence supported the jury’s verdicts.


United States v. Squillacote, 221 F.3d 542 (4th Cir. 2000)