United States v. Ruben Nungaray
2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 20816
| 9th Cir. | 2012Background
- Nungaray pled guilty to one count of unlawful possession of a firearm under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1).
- At sentencing, the district court found by a preponderance that he constructively possessed four additional firearms and applied a two-level enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2K2.1(b)(1)(A).
- The guns were allegedly sold to an undercover officer in Boise, Idaho on January 5, 2010, after an FBI informant indicated Nungaray’s intent to sell several firearms.
- Nungaray testified that Corrie, an elderly disabled friend, and others facilitated the sale, and that he acted as a go-between without taking possession of the guns.
- The district court rejected his broker- or liaison-type defense, concluding he had dominion and control over the guns through negotiation, direction of delivery, and receipt of payment.
- On appeal, Nungaray argues the evidence does not prove constructive possession by a preponderance; the government contends the evidence shows dominion and control.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether constructive possession was shown by preponderance of the evidence | Nungaray asserts he lacked dominion and control; broker theory should fail | Nungaray contends he did not exercise control over the guns | No error; preponderance shows dominion and control |
| Whether Barnett-Manzella distinctions affect constructive possession | Manzella controls asない | Manzella should distinguish broker role from possession | Manzella distinguished; facts here show control and delivery assurance |
| Whether district court relied on improper standards or formulaic reasoning | Court relied on general principles and model instructions | Court applied relevant law to facts and explained reasoning | No reversible error; reasoning tied to facts and controlling law |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Vasquez, 654 F.3d 880 (9th Cir. 2011) (dominance and control require knowledge and intent to exercise control)
- United States v. Cousins, 427 F.2d 382 (9th Cir. 1970) (constructive possession shown when defendant aids delivery and controls result)
- United States v. Barnett, 468 F.2d 1153 (9th Cir. 1972) (control requires assurance of delivery; substantial influence over contraband)
- United States v. Manzella, 791 F.2d 1263 (7th Cir. 1986) (distinguishes broker-like roles; requires ultimate control over drugs)
- United States v. Mejia-Luna, 562 F.3d 1215 (9th Cir. 2009) (controlling standard for constructive possession at sentencing is preponderance)
- United States v. Goodbear, 676 F.3d 904 (9th Cir. 2012) (standard of review for factual findings and application of guidelines)