United States v. Rodolfo Ochoa-Torres

Good Law
626 F.2d 689·1980 U.S. App. LEXIS 14706
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 21, 198079-1252California1,908 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wallace, J.

Ochoa-Torres (Ochoa) appeals his conviction for conspiring to distribute heroin in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 . He contends that (1) the government failed to produce substantial evidence to prove that he was a member of the alleged conspiracy at the time of the overt act alleged in the indictment; (2) the court in which he was tried, the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, lacked jurisdiction because the government failed to show that any act of the conspiracy occurred in that district; (3) the district court erred in allowing rebuttal testimony beyond the scope of Ochoa’s testimony in his own defense; and (4) the district court erred in imposing a three-year mandatory special parole term. We affirm in part and reverse and remand in part.

I.

The linchpin in the government’s case against Ochoa was the testimony of Figoroa, a paid informant. Figoroa came to the Fresno, California area in the fall of 1977 to help Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) agents uncover heroin dealers. On October 28, 1977, Figoroa met Ochoa’s codefendant, Garcia, in a Fresno bar, and introduced himself as a heroin buyer from Chicago. Garcia stated that he had some…

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.