United States v. Rafael Guzman-Solis

Good Law
666 F. App'x 628
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitNovember 17, 201615-10619, 15-10620California830 words

Opinion

Opinion

MEMORANDUM

Rafael Guzman-Solis appeals his conviction for illegal reentry after deportation, and the revocation of his supervised release. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm. Because the parties are familiar with the history of this case, we need not recount it.

I

The district court did not err in denying Guzman-Solis’s request for a Kastigar hearing on the improperly recorded attorney-client meeting. Under our precedent, Guzman-Solis had the burden to establish a prima facie case of prejudice resulting from the intrusion. United States v. Danielson, 325 F.3d 1054, 1071 (9th Cir. 2003). To make out a prima facie case under Danielson , he had to show that the government acted affirmatively to intrude into the attorney-client relationship; passive possession of information is not enough. Id. The district court reasonably found, based on evidence in the record, that the government’s recording of the attorney-client meeting was inadvertent and that no members of the prosecution team learned the contents of the privileged conversation. As a result, it did not abuse its discretion in declining to hold a Kasti-gar hearing or in declining to shift the burden 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.