United States v. Marcela Flores, United States of America v. Felipe Gonzalez-Esparza
Opinion
Opinion
These cases have been consolidated for purposes of appeal. Both appellants appeal from their convictions in the Central District of California for the following offenses: one count of conspiracy to possess and distribute a narcotic drug ( 21 U.S.C. § 846 ); two counts of possession with intent to distribute heroin ( 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(17)); and two counts of distribution of heroin ( 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(11)). Appellants were convicted pursuant to a court trial.
Several motions were filed by appellants during the course of the proceedings in the trial court, including (1) a motion to suppress evidence, (2) a motion for the admission of polygraph test results, (3) a motion for discovery, and (4) a motion for reduction of sentence. Appellants’ appeal is based on the District Court’s denial of these motions.
In announcing the conviction of the appellants the District Court Judge stated that he believed the testimony of the government’s witnesses and that he was particularly impressed with the credibility of the prosecution’s chief witness, a police informant named Ernesto Navarro. The. Judge further stated that he disbelieved the testimony of the defense witnesses.