United States v. Jose Hernandez
702 F. App'x 151
| 4th Cir. | 2017Background
- Defendant Jose Ivan Hernandez was convicted by a jury of conspiracy to distribute heroin (21 U.S.C. § 846) and money laundering conspiracy (18 U.S.C. § 1956) and sentenced to 432 months.
- On appeal, counsel filed an Anders brief conceding no meritorious issues but raising two questions: (1) admissibility of a DEA agent’s voice identification of Hernandez from phone recordings, and (2) denial of a motion to suppress evidence extracted from a Samsung T199 cell phone.
- DEA Agent Dustin Harmon testified about the investigation, including recorded calls between a confidential informant and Hernandez, and compared those calls to recordings of Hernandez from jail; Harmon had not met Hernandez in person.
- Other witnesses with personal knowledge of Hernandez’s voice later identified him in the recordings at trial.
- The district court initially excluded the phone evidence based on lack of voluntary consent but later admitted it under the independent source doctrine after a warrant-based search was executed.
- The Fourth Circuit reviewed evidentiary rulings for abuse of discretion and suppression rulings with mixed de novo/factual-clear-error standard, and affirmed the convictions.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of agent’s voice ID of recorded calls | Harmon’s comparison of recorded calls to jail recordings was sufficient to authenticate the recordings | Harmon lacked personal familiarity (never spoke with Hernandez in person), so his voice ID was unreliable and should be excluded | Court upheld admission: agent’s comparison satisfied Fed. R. Evid. 901(b)(5); any error harmless because other witnesses with personal knowledge identified the voice |
| Denial of motion to suppress phone data (Samsung T199) | Evidence should be suppressed because initial warrantless search lacked voluntary consent and tainted subsequent search | Evidence admissible under the independent source doctrine because a later warrant-based search was genuinely independent of the unlawful search | Court affirmed denial of suppression: warrant-based search was genuinely independent per Murray factors, so evidence admissible |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Wilson, 115 F.3d 1185 (4th Cir.) (authentication requirement for recordings)
- United States v. Branch, 970 F.2d 1368 (4th Cir.) (district courts wide latitude to find tape authenticity)
- United States v. McBride, 676 F.3d 385 (4th Cir.) (harmless-error standard where high probability error did not affect judgment)
- Murray v. United States, 487 U.S. 533 (Sup. Ct.) (independent source doctrine and factors for genuine independence)
- Utah v. Strieff, 136 S. Ct. 2056 (Sup. Ct.) (independent source and admissibility principles)