Court Considers Wiretap, Sufficiency, and Sentencing Issues
United States v. Zapata, ___ F.3d ___, 2008 WL 4138520 (10th Cir. 2008)
COA upholds convictions and sentences for 5 co-defendants in an extensive drug conspiracy prosecution involving many family members and friends. After a key bust that turned a transporter into a cooperator, the government obtained wire taps which in turn led to a 35 count indictment, including drug trafficking conspiracy, against 18 co-defendants. Only the five appellants went to trial, with many original defendants testifying against them.
Wiretaps properly obtained–government showed necessity and was not required to exhaust all conceivable other methods of investigation. Government showed the limited success of traditional investigative techniques.
Conspiracy related issues: conspiracy evidence sufficient; no plain error in conspiracy jury instructions (submitting own jury instruction does not serve as an objection to an allegedly improper one given by the court), and there was no improper inference that Defendants were guilty because others were; no error in denying severance–no improper spillover in the evidence.
Sentencing: appropriate to attribute the total amount of drugs involved in the long-standing conspiracy to all the Defendants. Within guidelines sentences substantively reasonable.
COA upholds convictions and sentences for 5 co-defendants in an extensive drug conspiracy prosecution involving many family members and friends. After a key bust that turned a transporter into a cooperator, the government obtained wire taps which in turn led to a 35 count indictment, including drug trafficking conspiracy, against 18 co-defendants. Only the five appellants went to trial, with many original defendants testifying against them.
Wiretaps properly obtained–government showed necessity and was not required to exhaust all conceivable other methods of investigation. Government showed the limited success of traditional investigative techniques.
Conspiracy related issues: conspiracy evidence sufficient; no plain error in conspiracy jury instructions (submitting own jury instruction does not serve as an objection to an allegedly improper one given by the court), and there was no improper inference that Defendants were guilty because others were; no error in denying severance–no improper spillover in the evidence.
Sentencing: appropriate to attribute the total amount of drugs involved in the long-standing conspiracy to all the Defendants. Within guidelines sentences substantively reasonable.
posted by Anonymous at 10:36 AM
<< Home