United States v. Jose Luis Gonzalez-Flores

Bad Law
418 F.3d 1093·2005 WL 1924724·67 Fed. R. Serv. 1232·2005 U.S. App. LEXIS 16898
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitAugust 12, 200503-10656California4,579 words

Opinion

Opinion

Fletcher, J.

Defendant-appellant Jose Luis Gonzalez-Flores (“Gonzalez”) was convicted of alien smuggling for leading a group of nearly two dozen Mexicans into the United States across the desert. In this direct appeal, Gonzalez claims that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction and that certain testimony admitted at trial was irrelevant and unduly prejudicial. Gonzalez also attacks his sentence on Booker grounds; the government argues in response that he waived his Sixth Amendment rights.

We hold that the evidence was sufficient to support the conviction and that the error arising from the admission of the prejudicial testimony was harmless, and therefore we affirm the conviction. However, we reject the government’s contention that Gonzalez waived his Sixth Amendment rights when his attorney moved to exclude the prejudicial testimony. We therefore remand the case pursuant to United States v. Ameline.

I. BACKGROUND

Gonzalez was convicted on one count of bringing in illegal aliens in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1324 (a)(1)(A)(i). The following facts emerged at trial:

Three members of the group, Miguel Gonzalez-Flores (no relation to defendant), Eduardo Salinas-Zagal, 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.