United States v. Burgos-Montes
786 F.3d 92
| 1st Cir. | 2015Background
- Burgos-Montes was convicted on four counts: two drug conspiracy counts and two murder counts arising from Semidey-Morales' disappearance.
- Semidey cooperated with the DEA as an informant against Burgos, including arranging meetings and providing conversations.
- A wiretap of Burgos' cell phone was authorized under 18 U.S.C. § 2518 with Semidey as a key informant; Corales later cooperated as an informant.
- Search warrants were executed on Burgos' farm and car, yielding DNA and other evidence linking him to the disappearance and drug activity.
- The district court denied several suppression motions, and Burgos raised multiple challenges at trial and on appeal, including juror bias and the death-penalty posture.
- Burgos was ultimately sentenced to life imprisonment after the death penalty could not be imposed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Wiretap suppression based on omissions | Burgos argues omissions undermine probable cause | Govt. contends omissions do not defeat probable cause | Omissions did not defeat probable cause; wiretap upheld |
| Wiretap necessity information | Omission regarding Corales negates necessity | Exigencies supported necessity despite omissions | Necessity adequately supported; omissions non-prejudicial |
| Sealing and compliance with Rule 41(e) | Non-immediate sealing and different-sealing judge violated rule | Delay and alternate judge do not undermine validity | No prejudice shown; sealing defects harmless |
| Juror bias during penalty phase | District court failed to properly investigate potential bias | In camera inquiry adequate; no bias shown | Court did not abuse discretion; no basis for acquittal/new trial |
| Sufficiency of evidence for counts | Evidence insufficient to prove specific intent and murder statutory elements | Evidence sufficient; multiple corroborating strands | Evidence sufficient to sustain conviction on all counts |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Young, 877 F.2d 1099 (1st Cir. 1989) (omission not fatal to probable cause if still sufficient under Franks)
- Cartagena, 593 F.3d 104 (1st Cir. 2010) (minimally adequate basis for wiretap necessity)
- Burke v. Town of Walpole, 405 F.3d 66 (1st Cir. 2005) (omissions in affidavits compared to probable cause sufficiency)
- United States v. Bonner, 808 F.2d 864 (1st Cir. 1986) (Rule 41 ministerial defects harmless absent prejudice)
- United States v. Yeje-Cabrera, 430 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2005) (probable cause and omission considerations in wiretaps)