United States v. Marquez-Perez
44 F. Supp. 3d 175
D.P.R.2014Background
- In Nov. 2013 PRPD surveilled Rene Marquez‑Perez (Marquez); agents observed him hide and retrieve a black fanny pack, engage in/direct transactions outside his residence, handle a pistol, and carry a black‑and‑white bag later found at his mother’s home.
- On Nov. 27, 2013 search warrants recovered from Marquez’s car a fanny pack containing crack, powder cocaine, marijuana, white pills, an empty .45 magazine, and drug paraphernalia; from his home and his mother’s home agents seized multiple firearms (including an AK‑47), magazines, ammunition, large quantities of drugs, scales, and packaging materials.
- Marquez told a Homeland Security agent he sold drugs and that the seized drugs and firearms belonged to him.
- A grand jury indicted Marquez on three counts of possession with intent to distribute (21 U.S.C. § 841), one count of possession of a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime (18 U.S.C. § 924(c)), and one count of possession of a firearm by a convicted felon (18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1)). A jury convicted on all counts; Marquez moved under Fed. R. Crim. P. 29 for acquittal.
- The district court reviewed the evidence in the light most favorable to the jury and granted the Rule 29 motion only as to the § 922(g) count, vacating conviction on count five; it denied the motion as to counts one through four.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether Marquez admitted ownership of both drugs and guns in post‑arrest interview | Government: agent’s testimony shows Marquez admitted the seized drugs and firearms were his | Marquez: agent’s question was leading; he admitted only to firearms ownership | Held: Ambiguity resolved for government; a reasonable jury could credit agent’s characterization and find Marquez admitted both (denied acquittal) |
| Sufficiency of evidence for possession with intent to distribute (Counts 1–3) — fanny pack | Government: surveillance, handling/hiding of fanny pack, packaged drugs, admissions, and observed sales support constructive possession and intent to distribute | Marquez: joint control with Michael, no proof he controlled fanny pack on indictment date, quantities insufficient to show intent | Held: Evidence (surveillance, packaging, quantities, admissions, observed transactions) sufficient for a reasonable jury to find constructive possession and intent to distribute (denied acquittal) |
| Sufficiency of evidence for possession with intent to distribute — mother’s home | Government: video showed Marquez carrying the black‑and‑white bag found at mother’s house; drugs and distribution paraphernalia were co‑located; admission supports possession and intent | Marquez: only one observed visit; no direct proof he controlled the room or those particular bags; quantity argument | Held: Circumstantial evidence plus admission permitted a jury inference of possession and intent to distribute (denied acquittal) |
| Sufficiency for § 924(c) — firearm in furtherance of drug trafficking | Government: guns were owned by Marquez, some were loaded and located near drugs/paraphernalia; observed testing/handling of pistol near transactions supports nexus | Marquez: intended to sell the guns or carried for self‑defense; would have carried gun in fanny pack if to protect drugs | Held: Objective factors (proximity, accessibility, loaded status, surrounding transactions) supported a jury inference that at least the pistol and AK‑47 were possessed in furtherance of drug trafficking (denied acquittal) |
| Whether prior Puerto Rico conviction qualified as a predicate felony for § 922(g) | Government: prior conviction counts as predicate because statute allowed up to 18 months; maximum sentence perspective | Marquez: statute imposed a fixed 12‑month term; Santa Velez (P.R. Sup. Ct.) holds judge lacked discretion to exceed 12 months absent jury finding of aggravating factors, so prior offense was not punishable by >1 year | Held: Court followed Puerto Rico Supreme Court precedent (Santa Velez) and Simmons/Carrchuri principles — prior conviction was for an offense punishable only by 1 year; conviction did not satisfy § 922(g) predicate element; acquittal/granted on count five and conviction vacated |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Bobadilla‑Pagan, 747 F.3d 26 (1st Cir. 2014) (Rule 29 sufficiency review and § 924(c) in‑furtherance factors)
- United States v. Pena, 586 F.3d 105 (1st Cir. 2009) (elements and nexus test for § 924(c) convictions)
- United States v. Marin, 523 F.3d 24 (1st Cir. 2008) (objective/subjective factors for firearm possession in furtherance of drug trafficking)
- United States v. Garcia‑Carrasquillo, 483 F.3d 124 (1st Cir. 2007) (constructive possession and intent to distribute standards)
- United States v. McLean, 409 F.3d 492 (1st Cir. 2005) (constructive possession requires power and intent to exercise dominion and control)
- Simmons v. United States, 649 F.3d 237 (4th Cir. 2011) (limiting consideration of hypothetical aggravating factors when determining whether a prior conviction qualifies as a federal predicate)
- Carachuri‑Rosendo v. Holder, 560 U.S. 563 (2010) (limits on considering facts outside record of conviction for predicate‑offense analysis)
- United States v. Stierhoff, 549 F.3d 19 (1st Cir. 2008) (standard for Rule 29 review; view evidence in government’s favor)