United States v. Burrows

36 F.3d 875 (9th Cir. 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

A DEA informant, Bugsy, had consensual telephone monitored conversations with Burrows (D). Bugsy offered to put D in touch with a prospective buyer who wished to purchase five pounds of meth. The buyer was a DEA agent. D went to his source, Rodriguez and got five pounds of meth and went to the exchange and was arrested. Immediately upon his arrest D professed that he was working undercover for the Riverside County Deputy Sheriff, Kenneth Vann, in order to arrest Rodriguez. D then offered to lure Rodriguez to the location with a story that the deal was going to fall apart because the buyers had not brought enough money. Rodriguez arrived with two companions to negotiate. They were arrested. D continued to cooperate with the government, but the government did not believe D's story and prosecuted D with the others. The deputy appeared at trial and disclaimed the fact that D was working for him but did state that he had meet with D and discussed that possibility. The jury was instructed on the defense of public authority. D was convicted, and D appealed; he could only make out a defense of public authority if he reasonably believed that he was acting pursuant to police authority.