DISCLAIMER: Any unofficial case summaries below are prepared by the clerk's office
as a courtesy to the reader. They are not part of the opinion of the court.
171014P.pdf 11/26/2018 United States v. Walter Escobar
U.S. Court of Appeals Case No: 17-1014
and No: 17-1018
and No: 17-1059
and No: 17-1170
and No: 17-1172
U.S. District Court for the District of Minnesota - St. Paul
[PUBLISHED] [Smith, Author, with Murphy and Colloton, Circuit Judges]
Criminal case - Criminal law and sentencing. This opinion is issued by
Chief Judge Smith and Judge Colloton pursuant to 8th Cir. R. 47E. Evidence
seized during a search made pursuant to an anticipatory search warrant was
admissible under the good-faith exception, as the totality of the
circumstances showed the police officers' reliance on the warrant was
objectively reasonable; no error in imposing a two-level enhancement
against defendant Escobar for possession of a dangerous weapon in
connection with a drug offense under Guidelines Sec. 2D1.1(b)(1); no error
in denying defendant Rojas-Andrade's motion to withdraw his guilty plea as
a misunderstanding of how the guidelines will apply is not a fair and just
reason to withdraw a plea; Rojas-Andrasde's below-Guidelines sentence was
not substantively unreasonable; no error in denying defendant Jackson's
motion to suppress wiretap evidence as the wiretap affidavit established
normal investigative techniques had not been successful in exposing the
full extent of the drug conspiracy; no error in denying Jackson's motion
to sever conspiracy and possession counts; no error in admitting evidence
of Jackson's two prior drug convictions as they were not too remote in
time and were relevant under Rule 404(b); evidence was sufficient to
support Jackson's convictions for conspiracy and possession with intent to
distribute; Jackson's below-Guidelines sentence was not substantively
unreasonable or an abuse of the court's discretion; defendant Garcia did
not object to the drug quantity calculation in his PSR or at his
sentencing and cannot challenge the quantity in this appeal as it is an
admitted fact; no error in admitting recorded out-of-court statements of
co-conspirators; evidence was sufficient to support the jury's finding
that defendant Cruz engaged in a conspiracy to distribute 500 or more
grams of methamphetamine; the court did not err in finding that 50 pounds
of methamphetamine seized from a co-conspirator were attributable to
defendant Cruz.