Acosta-Tapia

United States v. Acosta-Tapia

Good Law
69 F. App'x 885
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 10, 2003Nos. 02-10427, 02-10429; D.C. Nos. CR-01-00183-1-HDM, CR-01-00183-HDMCalifornia879 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Appellants Jose Manuel Acosta-Tapia and Marcos Antonio Ortiz appeal from the judgment of the district court following their guilty pleas to one count of conspiracy to possess methampethamine with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846 , 841. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Because the relevant facts are known to the parties, we discuss them here briefly and only as necessary.

Appellants contend that Ortiz did not give valid consent to search his vehicle because of the language barrier between him and officers and because he could not read the written consent form that he signed. We review for clear error the district court’s determination of whether a defendant’s consent to search was voluntary. United States v. Todhunter, 297 F.3d 886, 891 (9th Cir.2002).

Given the extent of the language barrier between the officers and the appellants, exemplified by Trooper Sines’s testimony that he knows only “a couple of words” in Spanish and that he questioned Ortiz in a mixture of English and improvised Spanish, this case lies at the margin of voluntary consent. As the district court noted, however, Ortiz was able 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.