United States v. Jaramillo-Suarez

950 F.2d 1378 (1991)

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

Narcotic enforcement agents began an investigation of D by conducting a surveillance of his activities. They identified a certain apartment as one frequently used by D. D drove a 1986 blue BMW and had a girlfriend named Carmen Wilkinson. Agents saw D leave the apartment in the BMW. He drove to a gas station and used a pay telephone for approximately one hour to make and receive calls. He then drove to a shopping center in Costa Mesa and met codefendant Michael Eliott. D and Eliott engaged in a number of activities none of which appeared to be illegal. Eventually, D returned to the apartment and Eliott returned to a room at the Roadway Inn. Agents observed activities for a second day. On the third day, they observed Eliott loading his truck and checking out of the Roadway Inn. As Eliott drove away, police stopped him. Eliott consented to a search of his truck. They found a manila envelope containing $25,500 in a briefcase. A dog trained to detect cocaine 'alerted' on both the envelope and Eliott's truck. Agents obtained search warrants for the apartments. At the first apartment, the agents found eighty-one kilograms of cocaine in four boxes and a suitcase. The agents also found numerous paper and plastic bags, money bags, tape, and a heat sealer at the apartment. At the San Juan Capistrano apartment, they found D's girlfriend inside. In the master bedroom, the agents found $130,000 in a briefcase, registration slips for a 1985 BMW vehicle and a 1986 BMW motorcycle, and $8,000 and a pay/owe sheet in the top drawer of a dresser. Border patrol agents in San Clemente stopped a vehicle in which D was a passenger. The federal agent found fifty-one $100 bills in D's shoe. He also discovered D's driver's license and a digital telephone paging device wedged between the console and passenger seat where Suarez had been seated. D was arrested. The ledger was introduced as evidence against D at trial. It was offered to show the character and use of D’s apartment. D appeals his conviction, arguing that the ledger was inadmissible hearsay.