United States v. Alex Pedrin, Jr.
2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 14409
9th Cir.2015Background
- ATF conducts stash-house reverse sting operations to entrap potential robbers of fictitious drug caches.
- Pedrin was the target of a stash-house sting in Arizona in August 2009, planned by ATF agent Richard Zayas.
- Zayas met with Pedrin (and co-conspirator Perez) and portrayed himself as a disgruntled cocaine courier aware of a stash house with 40–50 kilograms of cocaine guarded by armed men.
- Pedrin and Perez agreed to rob the stash house and recruited three accomplices; Pedrin supplied plans, walkie-talkies, and scanners for the operation.
- On August 21, the group was confronted by ATF/stakeout personnel during the planned robbery and fled; Pedrin was later charged with conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute 40–50 kg of cocaine.
- Pedrin argued the prosecution resulted from outrageous government conduct; the district court denied dismissal, and the Ninth Circuit affirmed, applying Black and related standards.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Did the reverse-sting constitute outrageous government conduct? | Pedrin (via Noonan dissent) says government inducemented crime via entrapment. | Pedrin's claim aligns with Black; the government’s conduct was not so outrageous as to violate due process. | No; conviction affirmed; conduct not outrageous. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Black, 733 F.3d 294 (9th Cir. 2013) (upheld sting as not outrageous; factors for outrageous conduct)
- United States v. Russell, 411 U.S. 423 (Supreme Court 1973) (due process standard for outrageous government conduct)
- United States v. Stinson, 647 F.3d 1196 (9th Cir. 2011) (extreme-case standard for dismissal under outrageous conduct)
- United States v. Restrepo, 930 F.2d 705 (9th Cir. 1991) (definition of outrageous conduct and universal sense of justice)
- Sorrells v. United States, 287 U.S. 435 (1932) (entrapment defense origins; government inducement invalidates prosecution)
- Sherman v. United States, 356 U.S. 369 (Supreme Court 1958) (entrapment standard reaffirmed; inducement by an informer)