COURT UPHOLDS PRIVACY IN BUYING BOOKS

Colo. Prosecutors Sought To Force Store Owner To Reveal Data On Drug Books

DENVER - The Colorado Supreme Court refused to order a bookstore
yesterday to tell police who bought two how-to books on making
illegal drugs, saying the First Amendment and state Constitution
protect the right to purchase books anonymously.

The unanimous 6-0 decision overturns a ruling by a Denver judge who
said Tattered Cover Book Store owner Joyce Meskis must give records
of the sale to a Denver-area drug task force.

Police and prosecutors in the closely watched case had argued that
the buyer's identity was critical to their investigation of a
methamphetamine lab and that they had no other way to prove who owned
the books.

But the high court declared that the First Amendment and the Colorado
Constitution "protect an individual's fundamental right to purchase
books anonymously, free from governmental interference."

Chris Finan, president of the American Booksellers Foundation for
Free Expression, said the ruling makes Colorado law the most
protective in the nation of a bookseller's right to protect the
identity of its customers. Colorado's Supreme Court is the only one
to rule on the issue, Finan said.

Police sought the records after finding a mailer envelope from the
bookstore outside a mobile home they had raided. Inside the home were
a methamphetamine lab and the how-to books Advanced Techniques of
Clandestine Psychedelic and Amphetamine Manufacture by Uncle Fester
and The Construction and Operation of Clandestine Drug Laboratories
by Jack B. Nimble.

The envelope was printed with an invoice number and the trailer's
address, but no name. Police found no fingerprints on the books and
obtained a search warrant to find out who ordered them. Police
suspected the man who lived in the master bedroom where the lab was
found, but needed proof.

The court said yesterday that the search warrant should never have been issued.

Tattered Cover, one of the country's largest independent bookstores,
had argued that the order violated its customers' First Amendment
rights. It was assisted in the case by the American Booksellers
Foundation for Free Expression.

So far, no arrests have been made in the drug case pending the
outcome of the court challenge. Police said yesterday that charges
would still be filed against the suspect without the store's records.

Bob Grant, the district attorney in adjacent Adams District, refused
to go after a search warrant, forcing police to go to the Denver
district attorney. Grant said the ruling sets a higher standard than
the one established by the U.S. Supreme Court.

He said the ruling will force prosecutors to show a compelling need,
as opposed to just the "substantial and legitimate interest" required
in most states.

Prosecutors could still go back to court with more evidence to meet
the higher standard.

Sue Armstrong, executive director of the American Civil Liberties
Union of Colorado, said the ruling does not prohibit police from
getting records but sets the bar higher for obtaining a search
warrant.

"The court has showed its best face in protecting the rights of
privacy for those of us who visit bookstores," she said.

Bookstore records became an issue in 1998 during the investigation of
President Clinton's relationship with Monica Lewinsky. Independent
counsel Kenneth W. Starr subpoenaed Lewinsky's purchase records from
the Washington bookstore Kramerbooks. After Kramerbooks challenged
the subpoena, Lewinsky's defense team voluntarily turned over the
records.

In another case, a Borders bookstore in Overland Park, Kan.,
successfully fought a subpoena issued in a drug investigation for
records of how a customer paid for merchandise. Investigators were
not trying to find out what books the customer bought.