United States v. Jim Ladesma (Ledesma), United States of America v. Oscar Venicio Quiroz-Santi

Good Law
499 F.2d 36·1974 U.S. App. LEXIS 8527
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMay 21, 197473-1583, 73-1582California7,686 words

Opinion

lead Opinion

Goodwin, J.

Jim Ledesma and Oscar Venido Quiroz-Santi appeal their convictions for conspiring to possess and distribute cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 and for possessing, with intent to distribute, cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(1). They assert errors in the admission of evidence and also seek reversals for insufficiency of the evidence. We affirm both convictions.

In November, 1972, Nancy Pena of North Hollywood, California, received a letter from her adopted sister, Isabelle Soto, an unindicted co-conspirator living in Chile. Soto requested a telephone number at which Pena could be reached. Pena had no telephone of her own, so she sent Soto the number of a friend and neighbor, Dora Acerbi. Beginning early in December, Pena received a series of calls on Acerbi’s telephone from Soto, in which the two discussed Soto’s plan to visit Pena in Los Angeles. Later, Soto canceled these travel plans, but said that instead, she would be sending presents for Pena’s children.

On December 1, 1972, a trunk from Chile arrived at the Los Angeles airport addressed to Pena. A routine customs inspection revealed over 22 pounds of cocaine concealed under a false bottom in the…

Opinion

499 F.2d 36 UNITED STATES OF America, Appellee, v. Jim Ladesma (LEDESMA), Appellant. UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Oscar Venicio QUIROZ-SANTI, Appellant. Nos. 73-1583, 73-1582. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. May 21, 1974. Martha Goldin (argued), Alan Saltzman, of Saltzman & Goldin, Hollywood, Cal., for appellant in 73-1583. Michael Kenney, Asst. U.S. Atty. (argued), Los Angeles, Cal., for appellee in 73-1583. Carl E. Stewart (argued), of Eilers, Stewart, Pangman & Millar, Newport Beach, Cal., for appellant in 73-1582. Michael Kenney, Asst. U.S. Atty. (argued), D. Henry Thayer, Eric A. Nobles, Asst. U.S. Attys., William D. Keller, U.S. Atty., for appellee in 73-1582. OPINION Before HUFSTEDLER and GOODWIN, Circuit Judges, and THOMPSON, /1/ District Judge. ALFRED T. GOODWIN, Circuit Judge: 1 Jim Ledesma and Oscar Venicio Quiroz-Santi appeal their convictions for conspiring to possess and distribute cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. 846 and for possessing, with intent to distribute, cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. 841(a)(1). They assert errors in the admission of evidence and also seek reversals for insufficiency of the evidence. We affirm both…

035concurrenceinpart Opinion

Hufstedler, J.

(concurring in part and dissenting in part):

Although I concur in the majority’s affirmance of Ledesma’s conviction, I cannot join in affirming Quiroz-Santi’s conviction. In my view, there was not sufficient independent proof of Quiroz-Santi’s knowledge of and participation in the conspiracy to permit introduction against Quiroz-Santi of hearsay testimony of statements made by alleged co-conspirators. Without the hearsay testimony, the evidence against Quiroz-Santi was not sufficient to sustain his conviction.

The Government produced only meager evidence of Quiroz-Santi’s knowing participation in the conspiracy apart from the hearsay testimony concerning telephone conversations between Nancy Pena and Isabelle Soto and the transcriptions of several of those conversations: (1) Quiroz-Santi flew with Ledesma from New York, shared a motel room with him, and accompanied him while Ledesma picked up and shipped the trunk; (2) Quiroz-Santi used a different address when renting a car from that used in renting the motel room; (3) he waited outside Pena’s apartment in a rented car while Ledesma picked up the trunk; and (4) he talked to Pena’s neighbor when Ledesma had difficulty…

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.