1. Whether evidence should have been suppressed because the Government improperly used an administrative warrant as a subterfuge to further a criminal investigation?

2. Whether the Government should have been precluded from reading a witness' interview verbatim to the jury over the Defendant's objection?

3. Whether judgment of acquittal should have been entered for the "serious bodily injury" components of Counts 14 and 18 where the victims did not sustain serious bodily injury?

Whether an administrative warrant used as a subterfuge for criminal investigation violates Fourth Amendment protections and whether reading police reports to a jury over defense objections constitutes reversible error