United States v. Juan Ramirez-Fuentes
2013 U.S. App. LEXIS 60
| 7th Cir. | 2013Background
- Ramirez-Fuentes confessed to possessing 3.1 kg of methamphetamine and two firearms found in his brother’s apartment; charged with possession with intent to distribute 500 g+ meth and possessing firearms in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime; trial court convicted and sentenced to 295 months; government expert described meth as 'Mexican methamphetamine' and discussed drug-trafficking violence; Ramirez-Fuentes argued improper testimony and sentencing relief due to deportation risk; on appeal, court affirms.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of violence testimony | Ramirez-Fuentes argues the violence-related testimony was irrelevant/unfairly prejudicial | Ramirez-Fuentes contends the testimony should be excluded under Rule 403 | Plain error not shown; evidence did not create miscarriage of justice |
| Ethnicity-related testimony | Admission of 'Mexican' methamphetamine testimony prejudices Ramirez-Fuentes | Government maintains relevance to drug trade particulars | Error but not reversible; plain-error review failed to show probable acquittal absent the testimony |
| Sentencing and deportation argument | Deportation risk should be meaningfully considered in sentencing | Deportation argument deemed stock and not substantial | District court properly considered §3553(a) factors; sentence within guidelines affirmed |
| Substantive reasonableness of sentence | 295 months is unreasonably long given circumstances | Within-range sentences presumed reasonable; district court weighed factors appropriately | Presumed reasonable; no abuse of discretion in sentence within guideline range |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Foster, 939 F.2d 445 (7th Cir. 1991) (plain error standard for unpreserved evidentiary issue)
- United States v. McMahan, 495 F.3d 410 (7th Cir. 2007) (plain error review guidance)
- United States v. Trujillo-Castillon, 692 F.3d 575 (7th Cir. 2012) (miscarriage-of-justice standard for plain error)
- United States v. Avila, 557 F.3d 809 (7th Cir. 2009) (relevance and admissibility of expert testimony)
- Hernandez, 865 F.2d 925 (7th Cir. 1989) (prohibition on race-conscious arguments in criminal trials)
- Smith v. Farley, 59 F.3d 659 (7th Cir. 1995) (no gratuitous references to race in prosecution)
- Cabrera, 222 F.3d 590 (9th Cir. 2000) (ethnicity-linked drug-trade testimony prejudicial under Rule 403)
- Vue, 13 F.3d 1206 (8th Cir. 1994) (ethnicity-generalization testimony prejudicial)
- Cruz, 981 F.2d 659 (2d Cir. 1992) (ethnicity references to drug trade prejudicial)
- Doe, 903 F.2d 16 (D.C. Cir. 1990) (ethnic generalizations in drug cases prejudicial)
- Mendoza, 576 F.3d 711 (7th Cir. 2009) (deportation considerations as stock argument in sentencing)
- Panaigua-Verdugo, 537 F.3d 722 (7th Cir. 2008) (consideration of deportation in sentencing up to discretion)