Miguel Rodriguez-Gastelum v. United States

Good Law
429 F.2d 536
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 24, 197024489_1California713 words

Opinion

Opinion

Byrne, J.

Fernando Terrazas testified that he had been working for five years as a civilian informer for the Federal Bureau of Narcotics; that he was paid by the case; that he first met the appellant while they were both working as farm hands in Stockton, California, in August, 1967. Terrazas further testified that appellant stated he would like to find a person interested in buying heroin. Terrazas then told appellant that he had a friend whom he might see when he returned to Arizona after Christmas.

In April, 1968, Terrazas received a telephone call from the appellant at his home in Arizona. The appellant told him that he had “located his man and was ready to deal”, and that he wanted Terrazas to see him in Calexico. Terrazas went to Calexico. Appellant stated that the “buy” would have to take place in Mexico, but Terrazas told him “nothing I can do. My man no want to deal up there.” (apparently referring to Mexico). No agreement was reached and Terrazas went home.

Thereafter the appellant and Terrazas communicated with each other on several occasions, but the appellant insisted that that deal must be consummated in Mexico while Terrazas stuck to his statement, “we still ain’t going to…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.