United States v. Rodriguez
Procedural entryThis page is a short order in United States v. Rodriguez. Read the opinion of the Court — 112 F.3d 26 →
Opinion
USCA1 Opinion
June 9, 1994 [NOT FOR PUBLICATION]
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT
___________________
No. 93-1811
UNITED STATES,
Appellee,
v.
ISIDRO RODRIGUEZ,
Defendant, Appellant.
__________________
APPEAL FROM THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE
[Hon. Joseph A. DiClerico, U.S. District Judge]
___________________
Before
Torruella, Cyr and Boudin,
Circuit Judges.
______________
___________________
John P. Rab and Rad & Neiman, on brief for appellant.
___________ ____________
Paul M. Gagnon, United States Attorney, and Jean B. Weld,
______________ _____________
Assistant United States Attorney, on brief for appellee.
__________________
__________________
Per Curiam. Appellant Isidro Rodriguez appeals his
___________
conviction on four counts of distributing cocaine, in
violation of 21 U.S.C. 841(a), and one count of using or
carrying a firearm during and in relation to a drug
trafficking crime, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 924(c)(1). We
summarily affirm.
I
In September 1989, Detective Ronald Scaccia of the
Nashua Police Department, working in an undercover capacity,
made three hand-to-hand purchases of cocaine from an
individual known to him as "Isidro" at 4 1/2 Kendrick Street
in Nashua, New Hampshire. After further investigation, the
Nashua police obtained a search warrant for the third floor
apartment in which Isidro lived. The search discovered over
one half kilogram of cocaine and paraphernalia associated
with the sale of cocaine hidden in a trap door within the
apartment. A .25 caliber semi-automatic handgun, a fully
loaded magazine of .25 caliber ammunition, and an additional
box of ammunition were found in a strong box, approximately
six feet from the trap door. A receipt for the purchase of
the gun, listing Rodriguez as the purchaser and showing an
address of 4 1/2 Kendrick Street, was also found in the box.
Various identification documents in the name of Isidro
Rodriguez, including rent receipts for a room at 4 1/2
-2-
Kendrick Street in the name of Isidro Rodriguez were found in
a dresser drawer. Rodriguez was not apprehended.
In December 1989, Rodriguez, along with five other
individuals, was indicted on one count of conspiracy to
distribute cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. 846. He was
also indicted on three counts of distributing cocaine, one
count of possession with intent to distribute cocaine, and
one count of possessing a handgun in furtherance of a drug
trafficking crime. An arrest warrant for Rodriguez was also
issued.
On April 14, 1992, the warrant was executed on an
individual, using the name of Ysidro Adames and residing in
Erie, Pennsylvania. Detective Scaccia positively identified
Adames as the person from whom he had purchased the drugs at
the Kendrick Street apartment. However, Adames' fingerprints
did not match those found in the search of the apartment and
he was released. Rodriguez was arrested in February 1993 in
Lawrence, Massachusetts. At the time Rodriguez was using the
name "Ysobel Gonzalez." Prior to trial, the government
dismissed all counts against the others who had been indicted
along with Rodriguez. It also dropped the conspiracy charge
against Rodriguez.
At trial, expert testimony was presented that Rodriguez'
fingerprints matched those found in the Kendrick Street
apartment. Rodriguez was also identified by Detective
-3-
Scaccia and by Sergeant Gravel, who had assisted in the
investigation, as the individual who had been involved in the
September 1989 distribution of cocaine. Finally, the mother
of Rodriguez' children testified at trial that the appellant
was the man she had known previously as "Isidro Rodriguez"
and that he had lived at 4 1/2 Kendrick Street until
approximately October 1989. She also testified that she had
given him the handgun as a gift.
The jury found Rodriguez guilty on all counts. He was
sentenced to concurrent terms of sixty three months'
imprisonment on each of the four counts of distributing
cocaine and a mandatory, consecutive term of sixty months on
the weapon's charge.
Rodriguez raises three issues on appeal. First, he
asserts that the district court erred in denying his motion
to suppress certain evidence seized during the search of the
Kendrick Street apartment. Second, he argues that his right
to obtain exculpatory evidence from the prosecution was
violated by the magistrate judge's denial of his requests for
certain materials. Finally, he contends that the evidence
was insufficient to support his conviction.
II
Rodriguez asserts that certain "identification"
evidence, including a resident alien card, a passport, and an
automobile title, found in a dresser drawer during the search
-4-
of the Kendrick Street apartment, should have been suppressed
on the ground that the items seized were beyond the scope of
the warrant. This contention, however, is belied by the
plain language of the warrant which authorizes a search for,
inter alia, "Records of Occupancy." The documents seized
_____ ____
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
United States v. Rodriguez, (1st Cir. 1994).
United States v. Rodriguez (United States v. Rodriguez) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.
Related
Brady v. Maryland
373 U.S. 83 (Supreme Court, 1963)
United States v. Agurs
427 U.S. 97 (Supreme Court, 1976)
Pennsylvania v. Ritchie
480 U.S. 39 (Supreme Court, 1987)
United States v. Paulino
13 F.3d 20 (First Circuit, 1994)
United States v. Juan Navarro, Andres Mugercia and Guillermo Perdomo
737 F.2d 625 (Seventh Circuit, 1984)
United States v. Robert J. Wilkinson
926 F.2d 22 (First Circuit, 1991)
United States v. Ramon Alfredo Abreu, A/K/A Carlos Juan
952 F.2d 1458 (First Circuit, 1992)
United States v. William Anthony Pou, United States of America v. Joseph Michael Pou, United States of America v. Miguel Mondejar
953 F.2d 363 (Eighth Circuit, 1992)
United States v. Julio Ernesto Arias-Santana
964 F.2d 1262 (First Circuit, 1992)
United States v. Brandon
17 F.3d 409 (First Circuit, 1994)
United States v. Drougas
748 F.2d 8 (First Circuit, 1984)