United States v. Juan Martinez-Navarro, United States of America v. Martin Enriques-Sanchez

Good Law
604 F.2d 1184
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 15, 197978-3445, 78-3446California967 words

Opinion

Opinion

Martinez-Navarro and Enriques-Sanchez assert that the district court impermissibly considered their testimony in a companion trial when fixing their sentences. We conclude that the trial judge, believing they lied while testifying under the grant of immunity, did not err when he considered that fact in determining, within the statutory limits, appropriate sentences.

Martinez-Navarro and Enriques-Sanchez were arrested by Border Patrol agents near the United States border along with a group of illegal aliens. A third person, Palomino-Figueroa, was stopped in the same area about an hour later. Martinez-Navarro and Enriques-Sanchez executed sworn statements that Palomino-Figueroa was “El Socio,” the smuggler with whom they had been working.

On September 19, 1978, Martinez-Navarro and Enriques-Sanchez were found guilty at a court trial, on stipulated facts, of violation of 18 U.S.C. § 371 , 8 U.S.C. § 1324 , and 18 U.S.C. § 2 . On September 20, 1978, the district court granted the government’s motion compelling them to testify at the trial of codefendant Palomino-Figueroa under a grant of immunity, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 6002 . During the jury trial, both Martinez-Navarro and…

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.