Regulations); Bureau of Prisons Regulations, 28 C.F.R. § 540.14 (1997) (requiring prison staff to open and inspect all incoming general correspondence and allowing staff to read outgoing correspondence of inmates in federal medium and high level security institutions). Hence, the Postal Service regulation regarding mail covers is irrelevant in appellant’s ease, and the DOC was justified in monitoring his mail. Further, even if the DOC had violated the Postal Service’s regulations regarding mail covers, Felipe still would not be entitled to the suppression of his letters because suppression is not an available remedy for violations of agency regulations that fail to raise constitutional questions. See United States v. Caceres, 440 U.S. 741, 755-57, 99 S.Ct. 1465, 59 L.Ed.2d 733 (1979) (<HOLDING>); United States v. Ani 138 F.3d 390, 392 (9th
holding that service is not avoided by service on a partys attorney as service on an attorney is ineffective unless he has been authorized to accept such service holding that failure of irs agent to follow irs electronic surveillance regulations before recording conversations between taxpayer and agent did not require suppression of tape recordings in prosecution of taxpayer accused of bribing irs agent since irs was not required by constitution to adopt its regulations governing electronic surveillance violation of agency regulations did not raise constitutional questions holding that evidence obtained in violation of internal revenue service regulations was admissible at the criminal trial of a taxpayer accused of bribing a service agent holding internal revenue service has standing to challenge validity of mortgage of seized property holding that agents violation of irs regulations did not mandate exclusion of evidence obtained as a result of violation