United States v. Mirabal

by
Defendant-appellant Gabriel Mirabel, a convicted felon and acting pro se, appealed when he was convicted on drug and weapon possession charges. Authorities thought that they saw Mirabal put an assault rifle in the trunk of a car. This sighting led authorities to arrange for a local officer to stop Mirabal for a traffic violation and to search the trunk. After telling Mirabal that he had been speeding, a sheriff deputy looked for an assault rifle. Though he didn’t find one, he did find a kilogram of cocaine in the car’s interior. The discovery of cocaine in the car became key evidence for one of the eventual charges against Mirabal. In defending against these charges, Mirabal argued that the search had violated his constitutional rights. At trial, the Government presented testimony by the owner of the car, Dominic Anaya, who had pleaded guilty to his own drug crimes. Anaya testified that he and Mirabal had worked together to sell cocaine. So Mirabal set out to impeach Anaya, asking Anaya about how much he expected his sentence to drop as a result of his plea agreement. Mirabal was allowed to probe the plea agreement in general terms, but not in detail. On appeal, Mirabal challenged the evidence involving the cocaine found in the care. He also challenged the restrictions placed on his cross-examination of Anaya. Furthermore, Mirabal challenged the sufficiency of the evidence presented against him at trial, alleging certain evidence was destroyed or otherwise withheld. Finding none of these challenges availing, the Tenth Circuit affirmed Mirabal’s convictions. View "United States v. Mirabal" on Justia Law