United States v. Carlos Alvarez-Espinoza

MEMORANDUM

Carlos Alvarez-Espinoza was convicted of multiple crimes arising out of the hostage taking of undocumented immigrants. He appeals his conviction and sentence to a total of 187 years in prison.

The district court did not err in denying Alvarez-Espinoza’s motion to dismiss the indictment due to the government’s failure to retain a witness who provided part of the basis for the search warrant. To support a dismissal of the indictment, Alvarez-Espinoza must show that the government acted in bad faith and caused prejudice to his case, and as conceded at oral argument, he cannot make any such showing. See United States v. Gastelum-Almeida, 298 F.3d 1167, 1174 (9th Cir.2002).

The district court imposed 18 U.S.C. § 924 (c)(l)(A)(ii)’s mandatory minimum seven-year sentence consecutive to the greater mandatory minimum sentences required by the subsequent firearms convictions on other counts. Alvarez-Espinoza contends this was error. The issue is the same as that recently decided by the Supreme Court in Abbott v. United States, — U.S. -, 131 S.Ct. 18 , 178 L.Ed.2d 348 (2010). The Court held that “a defendant is subject to a mandatory, consecutive sentence for a § 924(c)…