United States v. Nicolas Gomez
763 F.3d 845
| 7th Cir. | 2014Background
- Federal agents investigated Nicolas Gomez (Güero) in a Chicago–Milwaukee cocaine distribution network using wiretaps on Romero.
- Phones linked Güero to a residence at 2522 West Mineral Street in Milwaukee, where Gomez and Reyes lived; a September 3 exchange occurred near Gomez’s house.
- Agents seized Romero’s car with a quarter-kilogram of cocaine, shortly after Romero and Güero’s September 3 meeting.
- Gomez was charged with conspiracy and related drug-offense counts; over 50 recorded calls tied Güero to Gomez’s residence and activities.
- The government sought to admit a small quantity of cocaine found in Gomez’s bedroom to prove identity as Güero under Rule 404(b); trial court admitted it, Gomez was convicted.
- On en banc review, the court replaced the circuit’s four-part Rule 404(b) test with a rules-based framework and held the bedroom cocaine evidence was admissible for identity but the error was harmless.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of other-act evidence to prove identity | Gomez argues 404(b) evidence was improper for identity | Gomez contends evidence relied on improper propensity inferences | Error, but harmless |
| Rules-based framework for Rule 404(b) admissibility | Gomez/United States argue for standard 4-part test remains | Court should adopt clearer rules-based approach | Adoption of rules-based framework approved; 4-part test abrogated |
Key Cases Cited
- Huddleston v. United States, 485 U.S. 681 (U.S. 1988) (set standard for relevance conditioned on a fact; no requirement to prove act by preponderance before admission)
- Old Chief v. United States, 517 U.S. 172 (U.S. 1997) (sticking to full evidentiary force; stipulation can undermine probative value of prior acts)
- Beasley v. United States, 809 F.2d 1273 (7th Cir. 1987) (warns against automatic admission of 404(b) if only propensity rationale remains)
- Miller v. United States, 673 F.3d 688 (7th Cir. 2012) (limits automatic admission; requires non-propensity basis and 403 balancing)
- Lee v. United States, 724 F.3d 968 (7th Cir. 2013) (emphasizes chain-of-reasoning to connect 404(b) evidence to non-propensity purpose)
- Gibson v. United States, 170 F.3d 673 (7th Cir. 1999) (admission of history of drug dealing can be improper when used to prove identity by propensity)
- Simpson v. United States, 479 F.3d 492 (7th Cir. 2007) (holding that 404(b) evidence used to prove identity via prior acts may be improper if propensity-based)