90 F.4th 689
4th Cir.2024Background
- Ortiz-Orellana ("Ortiz") and Minor Perez-Chach ("Perez") were convicted by jury in 2016 for RICO conspiracy, murder in aid of racketeering (VICAR), and related federal firearm offenses, stemming from MS-13 gang activities in Maryland.
- Ortiz was involved in the premeditated murder of Erick Mendez-Orellana, a rival gang member, while Perez was involved in the murder of Nicholas Gonzalez (mistaken for a government informant known as "Shorty").
- Key evidence included historical cell site location information (CSLI) collected pursuant to the Stored Communications Act (SCA), obtained without a warrant in 2013, and used to link the defendants to the crime scenes.
- The trial court denied motions to suppress the CSLI evidence and allowed the use of chart summaries of phone records at trial, with limiting jury instructions.
- Ortiz received multiple life sentences plus additional years; Perez was sentenced to life on major counts. Both appealed their convictions and sentences on several grounds.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Suppression of CSLI (cell location data) | Seizure without a warrant violated Fourth Amendment under Carpenter; CSLI must be excluded | Good faith exception applies since pre-Carpenter; orders followed then-existing law | Good faith exception applies; suppression challenge rejected |
| Use of summary exhibits and summary testimony | Charts and summary testimony unduly prejudicial; lacked sufficient limiting instructions | Charts were illustrative aids, not evidence; jury was sufficiently instructed | Court gave proper limiting instructions; no abuse of discretion or plain error |
| Validity of firearm convictions as "crimes of violence" | VICAR murder could rest on Maryland law, which may include felony murder (not a crime of violence post-Jackson) | VICAR murder here was premeditated under a divisible statute; thus, a crime of violence | Maryland statute divisible; premeditated murder qualifies; convictions upheld |
| Double Jeopardy (RICO & VICAR) | Convictions for both violate Double Jeopardy Clause | Each offense contains different elements/cumulative punishments allowed | No Double Jeopardy violation |
| Reasonableness of Sentences | Sentences, especially for Ortiz, were substantively unreasonable given mitigating factors | Sentences consistent with § 3553(a) and comparable to similar cases | Sentences affirmed, except for counts affected by Palacios and Lora |
| Consecutive sentencing for firearm convictions | Court wrongly imposed mandatory consecutive sentences for § 924(c) and § 924(j) | Cumulative punishments not allowed per Palacios; Lora permits concurrent sentences | Count 9 vacated and remanded for dismissal; Count 10 to be resentenced |
Key Cases Cited
- Davis v. United States, 564 U.S. 229 (good faith exception to exclusionary rule)
- Carpenter v. United States, 138 S. Ct. 2206 (warrant required for CSLI access)
- United States v. Jackson, 32 F.4th 278 (felony murder not a "crime of violence" under § 924(c))
- Borden v. United States, 141 S. Ct. 1817 (recklessness insufficient for "crime of violence")
- Johnson v. United States, 559 U.S. 133 (definition of "violent force")
- United States v. Palacios, 982 F.3d 920 (§ 924(c) and § 924(j) sentencing cannot be cumulative for same conduct)
- Gall v. United States, 552 U.S. 38 (deference in review of sentencing decisions)