State v. Pacheco

882 P.2d 183 (1994)

Purchase the Printed Copy at bsmsphd.com

Nature of the Case

To access this section all you need to do is click here and register.

Facts

D met Dillon in 1985 when D worked about 2 months for Dillon's private investigation firm. D bragged to Dillon about his involvement in illegal activities, including enforcement, collecting debts, procuring weapons, providing protection, and performing 'hits.' Dillon learned that D was a Clark County deputy sheriff. Dillon contacted the FBI and volunteered to inform on D. The FBI began an investigation of D. The Clark County Sheriff's office joined, and later directed the investigation. As part of the string, Dillon asked D to perform various jobs, including collections and information checks on individuals. Dillon and D met at a restaurant. Dillon said he had ties to the 'Mafia' and offered D $500 in exchange for protection during a cocaine deal. D was to protect Dillon during the transaction. D agreed. An undercover agent arrived, and the purported drug transaction took place. Afterward, Dillon paid D $500. A second transaction was done, and D got another $500. Dillon called D and pretended he had been shortchanged $40,000 in that afternoon's drug transaction. Dillon said he had been given $10,000 by his superiors to take care of the situation. At a face to face meeting, D offered to kill the drug buyer for $10,000. D indicated if he had to kill anyone else, it would cost more. D proposed he go get his gun while Dillon located the drug buyer at his motel. They decided D would go to the lobby of the motel, call the buyer and convince him to come down to the lobby where D would then shoot him. D went to the lobby with a loaded gun, but he did not call the buyer's room. As D left the lobby, sheriff's deputies arrested him. D contended he was collecting evidence to build a case against Dillon and he thought he was following police procedures. D was charged with conspiracy to commit first-degree murder, attempted first-degree murder, two counts of unlawful delivery of a controlled substance, two counts of conspiracy to deliver a controlled substance, and official misconduct. The official misconduct charge was dismissed. The jury found D not guilty of attempted first-degree murder but convicted him on all other counts. The Court of Appeals affirmed the convictions. D contends that a conspiracy cannot exist when the sole coconspirator is an undercover agent.