United States v. Recio

537 U.S. 270 (2003)

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

In United States v. Cruz, 127 F. 3d 791, 795 (CA9 1997), the Ninth Circuit, following the language of an earlier case, United States v. Castro, 972 F. 2d 1107, 1112 (CA9 1992), wrote that a conspiracy terminates when ' 'there is affirmative evidence of abandonment, withdrawal, disavowal or defeat of the object of the conspiracy' ' (emphasis added). It considered the conviction of an individual who, the Government had charged, joined a conspiracy (to distribute drugs) after the Government had seized the drugs in question. The Circuit found that the Government's seizure of the drugs guaranteed the 'defeat' of the conspiracy's objective, namely, drug distribution. The Circuit held that the conspiracy had terminated with that 'defeat,' i.e. when the Government seized the drugs. Hence the individual, who had joined the conspiracy after that point, could not be convicted as a conspiracy member. In this case, police stopped a truck in Nevada. They found and seized, a large stash of illegal drugs. With the help of the truck's two drivers, they set up a sting. The Government took the truck to the drivers' destination, a mall in Idaho. The drivers paged a contact and described the truck's location. The contact said that he would call someone to get the truck. And three hours later, Francisco Jimenez Recio (D) and Adrian Lopez-Meza (D1), appeared in a car. D drove away in the truck; Lopez-Meza drove the car away in a similar direction. Police stopped both vehicles and arrested both men. A jury convicted all four defendants. The trial judge then decided that the jury instructions had been erroneous in respect to D and D1. The judge noted that the Ninth Circuit, in Cruz, had held that the Government could not prosecute drug conspiracy defendants unless they had joined the conspiracy before the Government seized the drugs. The judge ordered a new trial where the jury would be instructed to that effect. The new jury convicted the two men once again. Ds appealed. The Ninth Circuit panel, by a vote of 2 to 1, agreed with Ds. All three-panel members accepted Cruz as binding law. Two members concluded that the evidence presented at the second trial was not sufficient to show that Ds had joined the conspiracy before the Nevada drug seizure.