United States v. Gino Gonzaga Rodriquez, United States of America v. Gino Gonzaga Rodriquez

Bad Law
464 F.3d 1072·2006 WL 2828685·2006 U.S. App. LEXIS 24845
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 5, 200604-30397, 04-30494California4,086 words

Opinion

Opinion

Rawlinson, J.

A jury convicted Gino Rodriquez of being a felon in possession of a firearm. On appeal, he argues that the district court erred in denying his motion to suppress the firearm because consent to search was not voluntary. He also contends that there was insufficient evidence to support his conviction. On cross-appeal, the government maintains that the district court erroneously concluded that Rodriquez’s prior drug convictions do not qualify as predicate offenses under the Armed Career Criminal Act (ACCA), 18 U.S.C. § 924 (e)(1). We conclude that the search was conducted pursuant to a valid consent; there was sufficient evidence to support the jury’s finding that Rodriquez possessed the firearm; and the district court — relying on United States v. Corona-Sanchez, 291 F.3d 1201 (9th Cir.2002) (en banc) — correctly held that Rodriquez’s prior drug convictions do not qualify as predicate offenses under the ACCA. We therefore affirm.

I

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL BACKGROUND

Gino Rodriquez has several felony convictions in Washington State, including three convictions for delivery of a controlled substance. Rodriquez served his time and, upon his release, was placed on a term of community…

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.