OK to Destroy Evidence of Meth Production; Sentence Enhancement for Causing Death OK But Restitution for the Death Reversed

U.S. v. Ward, 2006 WL 1462166 (5/30/06)(unpub'd) - It was not a due process violation for a firm hired by the DEA to destroy the evidence of meth production, since the DEA followed its procedures and it usually destroys almost all meth-related items, especially when a fire has occurred as in this case. The 10th did say, however: "In spite of the destruction policy (and the deference of other investigatory agencies) bad faith might be inferred." But, that was not the factual finding in this case. End of story. The defendant's prior convictions for manufacturing meth were properly admitted to show knowledge of the meth production process, even though the defendant had previously used a different method of production. The d.ct. erred in imposing restitution for the parents of the deceased victim of the fire that consumed the trailer where the meth was produced because the defendant was acquitted of the murder charge. While the court could enhance the defendant up the wahzoo (sp.) imprisonment-wise for related conduct such as killing someone, the restitution statute did not allow imposing restitution based on conduct of which the defendant was not convicted.