United States v. King
627 F.3d 641
| 7th Cir. | 2010Background
- King, a high-ranking Latin Kings member, was charged with conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute >5 kg cocaine and attempted possession with intent to distribute 500 g+ cocaine.
- Guajardo, a lower-ranking member, cooperated with ATF and secretly supplied information, initiating an insurance-for-protection arrangement with King and Zambrano.
- Guajardo delivered a kilo of cocaine to King at a taqueria; the kilo was sham and later seized by officers during a search.
- Cabrera-Lopez, the taqueria cook, consented to a search; officers relied on apparent authority due to Cabrera-Lopez's access and control over premises.
- Gang-related evidence linking King and Zambrano to the conspiracy was admitted to prove joint venture, leadership roles, and motive.
- The district court denied suppression, admitted gang evidence, refused entrapment instructions, and denied a mistrial after a jury safety note.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether suppression ruling was proper | United States contends valid consent, no Fourth Amendment error | King argues improper initial entry and invalid consent | No reversible error; consent valid and entry lawful |
| Admission of gang-related evidence | United States shows probative value to prove conspiracy and leadership | King claims prejudice from gang emphasis | Abuse of discretion avoided; evidence properly probative and not unduly prejudicial |
| Entapment instruction | United States argues no predisposition defense supported entrapment | King asserts lack of predisposition warranting entrapment instruction | District court properly refused entrapment instruction |
| Jury note/inquiry | United States contends no extrinsic influence shown | King urges inquiry due to safety concerns affecting impartiality | No abuse; note intrinsic to trial, no extrinsic influence shown |
| Sufficiency of conspiracy evidence | United States presented circumstantial evidence of meeting of the minds | King argues lack of direct Zambrano agreement | Evidence sufficient for conspiracy beyond reasonable doubt |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Groves, 530 F.3d 506 (7th Cir. 2008) (apparent authority in third-party consent inquiries implied)
- United States v. Matlock, 415 U.S. 164 (U.S. 1974) (apparent authority and third-party consent doctrine)
- United States v. Pineda-Buenaventura, 622 F.3d 761 (7th Cir. 2010) (duty to inquire on third-party authority when reasonable)
- United States v. Alviar, 573 F.3d 526 (7th Cir. 2009) (gang evidence admissible to prove conspiracy under proper limits)
- United States v. Corson, 579 F.3d 804 (7th Cir. 2009) (circumstantial proof allowed for conspiracy, not reweighing credibility)
- United States v. Taylor, 116 F.3d 269 (7th Cir. 1997) (conspiracy may be shown by circumstantial evidence)
- United States v. Hicks, 368 F.3d 801 (7th Cir. 2004) (standard for reviewing conspiracy conviction sufficiency)