Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Aguirre-Rivera

United States District Court, W.D. Texas, El Paso Division

January 3, 2020

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
v.
BALTAZAR AGUIRRE-RIVERA Defendant.

          ORDER DENYING MOTION TO ENTER A JUDGMENT OF ACQUITTAL

          PHILIP R. MARTINEZ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

         On this day, the Court considered Defendant Baltazar Aguirre-Rivera's [hereinafter “Defendant”] “Motion to Enter a Judgment of Acquittal” (ECF No. 93) [hereinafter “Motion”], filed on November 12, 2019; the Government's “Response to Defendant's Motion for a Judgment of Acquittal” (ECF No. 94) [hereinafter “Response”], filed on November 22, 2019; and Defendant's “Reply to Government's Response to Defendant's Motion to Enter a Judgment of Acquittal” (ECF No. 95) [hereinafter “Reply”], filed on December 4, 2019, in the above-captioned cause. After due consideration, the Court is of the opinion that Defendant's Motion should be denied for the reasons that follow.

         I. FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

         In the above-captioned cause, Defendant proceeded to jury trial on one count, conspiracy to possess a controlled substance with the intent to distribute the same. Ct's. Instrs. to Jury 20, Nov. 5, 2019, ECF No. 86. The Court, consistent with the jury charge, instructed the jury to find the Defendant guilty if the Government proved the following elements beyond a reasonable doubt:

First: That two or more persons, directly or indirectly, reached an agreement to possess heroin with intent to distribute the same;
Second: That the defendant knew of the unlawful purpose of the agreement;
Third: That the defendant joined in the agreement willfully, that is, with intent to further its unlawful purpose;
Fourth: That the overall scope of the conspiracy involved at least one kilogram or more of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of heroin; and
Fifth: That the defendant knew or reasonably should have known that the scope of the conspiracy involved at least one kilogram or more of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of heroin.

Id. at 21. The Court's verdict form asks for a verdict on the above count, “Count One, ” and the jury found the Defendant, “Guilty.” Verdict, Nov. 5, 2019, ECF No. 91.

         The Court's verdict form also instructs the jury to answer two special interrogatories if it finds the Defendant guilty on Count One. Id. The first interrogatory asks, “Do you find beyond a reasonable doubt that the overall scope of the conspiracy involved at least one kilogram or more of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of heroin?” Id. The jury answered, “Yes.” Id. The second interrogatory asks, “Do you find beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant knew or reasonably should have known that the scope of the conspiracy involved at least one kilogram or more of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of heroin?” Id. The jury answered, “No.” Id.

         Defendant argues in his Motion that the Court should enter a judgment of acquittal because the jury's answer to the second interrogatory undermines the jury's finding of guilt. Mot. 1.

         II. LEGAL STANDARD AND ANALYSIS

         The Court is of the opinion that Defendant's Motion should be denied because the jury's answer to the special interrogatory does not undermine the jury's finding of guilt on the essential elements of the charged crime. Rather, the jury's finding in the second ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.