United States v. Miguel Angel Rodriguez

Miguel Angel Rodriguez (“Rodriguez”) appeals from his conviction and sentencing for possession of a prohibited object in a federal prison in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1791 (a)(2) (1988). Rodriguez argues that the district court erred by 1) failing to give Ms requested jury instruction relating to the intent required by one of the defimtions of proMbited object specified in 18 U.S.C. § 1791 (d)(1)(B); 2) admitting testimony concerning Rodriguez’ actions subsequent to confiscation of the prohibited object; and 3) allowing the prosecution to present an inflammatory and prejudicial closing argument. We set aside the conviction and remand for a new trial.

I.

Rodriguez was in custody in the Metropolitan Correctional Center in San Diego, California, awaiting sentencing on his conviction for possession of marijuana with intent to distribute. He was discovered to be in possession of an object which all parties agree was a prohibited object. Rodriguez admits knowing at the time it was prohibited.

Rodriguez made the object in question from an old metal knee brace. It was approximately mne inches long and consisted of a handle and two prongs secured by a piece of cloth. The appellant…