United States v. Pamela Mejia Armenta Iglesias

881 F.2d 1519 110 A.L.R.Fed. 299 UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Pamela Mejia Armenta IGLESIAS, Defendant-Appellant. No. 88-3052. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted May 2, 1989. Decided Aug. 15, 1989. Stephen M. Jacobson, Asst. Federal Public Defender, Portland, Or., for defendant-appellant. Frank Noonan, Asst. U.S. Atty., Portland, Or., for plaintiff-appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Oregon. Before TANG, BOOCHEVER and KOZINSKI, Circuit Judges. TANG, Circuit Judge: 1 On January 28, 1988, pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P. 11(a)(2), Pamela Iglesias entered a conditional guilty plea to a charge of possession with intent to distribute heroin, reserving her right to appeal the district court's denial of her motions to suppress and to compel discovery. We first determine whether the district court erred in refusing to suppress Iglesias' incriminating cash that was seized when police searched her sister's residence. Secondly, we decide whether the district court erred in ruling that Fed.R.Crim.P. 16(a)(1)(D) does not compel production by the government of certain internal documents. We affirm.I. Factual…

On January 28, 1988, pursuant to Fed.R. Crim.P. 11(a)(2), Pamela Iglesias entered a conditional guilty plea to a charge of possession with intent to distribute heroin, reserving her right to appeal the district court’s denial of her motions to suppress and to compel discovery. We first determine whether the district court erred in refusing to suppress Iglesias’ incriminating cash that was seized when police searched her sister’s residence. Secondly, we decide whether the district court erred in ruling that Fed.R.Crim.P. 16(a)(1)(D) does not compel production by the government of certain internal documents. We affirm.

*1521 I. Factual and Procedural Background

On August 12,1987, a grand jury handed down a seven-count indictment against Iglesias and Collins. Count VII charged Iglesias and Collins with possession with intent to distribute heroin in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841 (a)(1) to which Iglesias entered her conditional guilty plea. Judge Frye imposed a sentence of 12 years imprisonment followed by a Special Parole Term of 6 years. Iglesias is currently in federal custody serving this sentence.

A. Suppression Issue

The facts relevant to the suppression issue follow. On July…

dissenting in part:

Because I believe that the documents generated in connection with the chemical testing are discoverable under Fed.R. Crim.P. 16, I respectfully dissent.

I. The Discovery Ruling

Rule 16(a)(1)(D) specifies that “[u]pon request of a defendant the government shall permit the defendant to inspect and copy or photograph any results or reports ... of scientific tests or experiments ... which are within the possession, custody or control of the government ... and which are material to the preparation of the defense. ...” The construction of the rule is a question of law which we review de novo. See United States v. Horowitz, 756 F.2d 1400, 1403 (9th Cir.), cert. denied, 474 U.S. 822 , 106 S.Ct. 74 , 88 L.Ed.2d 60 (1985).

The government refused a request that encompasses the chemist’s log notes. All that has been furnished is a report containing the weight of the substance tested and the conclusory statement that the material contained heroin with a strength of 54.9%.

For its restrictive construction of the terms “any results or reports” the majority relies on certain dictionary definitions of a report as “an official or formal statement of facts or proceedings,”…