United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts · 2019-03-14
21usc846: author: Flash3 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)
Case and law context
Role: applied; posture: Post-verdict Rule 29 motion for judgment of acquittal on conspiracy count; result: claimant-lost; claim:
Uncertainty
Element agreement: route: no course of dealing existed; the sub-question is whether a tacit agreement can be inferred from presence plus one reactive act of concealment. inferred-from-dealings is the nearest menu route (tacit rather than express agreement).
Misfit
The court decides agreement and joinder in one breath (the charged conspiracy had two members, so no agreement without defendant's joinder); the two blocks split a single holding.
Claimant outcome refers to the prosecuting government; claimant-lost reflects the post-verdict Rule 29 judgment of acquittal vacating the jury's conspiracy conviction for insufficient evidence.
B · Case × element grid
Top-level elements follow claim order in panels of up to six elements. Case rows repeat across panels. Every recorded block retains its holding and basis; multiple blocks are not merged into a case-level verdict. ✓ satisfied · ✗ not satisfied · ○ not reached · · not addressed. Muted blocks are not counted. Sub-element evidence remains on case and element pages.
Elements 1–6 of 8
| Case | Identified offense in Subchapter I | Agreement of two or more persons to the unlawful object | Knowledge of the unlawful agreement and objective | Knowing and voluntary participation in the agreement | Withdrawal before the applicable limitations period | Intent to commit the identified object offense |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| United States v. Guzman-Ortiz — 365 F. Supp. 3d 215 (2019) · United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts · 2019 (21usc846: author: Flash3 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed | · not addressed |
Elements 7–8 of 8
| Case | Conduct beyond preparation strongly corroborating intent | Object-offense penalty incorporation |
|---|---|---|
| United States v. Guzman-Ortiz — 365 F. Supp. 3d 215 (2019) · United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts · 2019 (21usc846: author: Flash3 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | · not addressed | · not addressed |
Instances and excluded annotation blocks
| Case | Element | Holding and scope | Pattern | Exact source quotations |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| United States v. Guzman-Ortiz — 365 F. Supp. 3d 215 (2019) · United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts · 2019 — not · no-evidence (21usc846: author: Flash3 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | Agreement of two or more persons to the unlawful object | not Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: no-evidence The charged conspiracy had only two members (defendant and Soto-Peguero). Helping to hide a kilogram of heroin when agents pounded on the door was the only evidence of any agreement, and the court held a tacit agreement to distribute could not reasonably be inferred from it. | two-person-conspiracy/visitor-helps-hide-heroin-during-raid | Criminal conspiracies are naturally secretive and the government need not prove an express agreement between co-conspirators.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_365.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/365/0215-01; Unicode character offsets [9062:9187] (end exclusive); SHA-256 8371f1741f10e07c9143d36e906600deedd9f497616af5f0247ae3a2eebfb98c.One kilogram of heroin, wrapped entirely in black electrical tape, was partially stuffed in an air vent below the window in the upstairs room where defendant and Soto-Peguero had been observed during the attempted front door entry.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_365.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/365/0215-01; Unicode character offsets [4646:4877] (end exclusive); SHA-256 8371f1741f10e07c9143d36e906600deedd9f497616af5f0247ae3a2eebfb98c.None of the intercepted communications referred to or were exchanged with defendant, nor was there any evidence of his knowledge thereof.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_365.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/365/0215-01; Unicode character offsets [3305:3442] (end exclusive); SHA-256 8371f1741f10e07c9143d36e906600deedd9f497616af5f0247ae3a2eebfb98c.Although forensics later identified latent fingerprints on the bricks matching Soto-Peguero's, no such evidence of defendant's participation was adduced.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_365.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/365/0215-01; Unicode character offsets [3673:3826] (end exclusive); SHA-256 8371f1741f10e07c9143d36e906600deedd9f497616af5f0247ae3a2eebfb98c.There was no evidence that the drug distribution paraphernalia had been used on the day in question, or that the heroin seized from Cabral had been prepared and packaged that day, or that defendant was aware of or had participated in such activities.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_365.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/365/0215-01; Unicode character offsets [6367:6617] (end exclusive); SHA-256 8371f1741f10e07c9143d36e906600deedd9f497616af5f0247ae3a2eebfb98c.That evidence provides an insufficient basis for finding or inferring the existence of an agreement between defendant and Soto-Peguero to possess and distribute heroin, and to determine beyond a reasonable doubt that defendant intentionally entered into such a compact with the requisite knowledge and purpose.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_365.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/365/0215-01; Unicode character offsets [15875:16185] (end exclusive); SHA-256 8371f1741f10e07c9143d36e906600deedd9f497616af5f0247ae3a2eebfb98c.Because the evidence was insufficient to sustain the jury's verdict on Count 6, the verdict on that Count is set aside, and it is ordered that judgment of acquittal be entered on that Count.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_365.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/365/0215-01; Unicode character offsets [18191:18381] (end exclusive); SHA-256 8371f1741f10e07c9143d36e906600deedd9f497616af5f0247ae3a2eebfb98c. |
| United States v. Guzman-Ortiz — 365 F. Supp. 3d 215 (2019) · United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts · 2019 — not · no-evidence (21usc846: author: Flash3 · QA: FIX (Fable, neov2/cases/TRIAGE-Flash.md)) | Knowing and voluntary participation in the agreement | not Counted merits instance applied / merits basis: no-evidence Presence in the apartment and probable awareness of drug activity were accepted; what failed was proof that defendant chose to participate. The court refused to infer membership from "human experience" absent evidence of the parties' relationship. | mere-presence-at-stash-apartment/knowledge-without-participation | Similarly, the fact that a defendant "knew what was going on" is, by itself, "not enough to establish intent to conspire."Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_365.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/365/0215-01; Unicode character offsets [9830:9952] (end exclusive); SHA-256 8371f1741f10e07c9143d36e906600deedd9f497616af5f0247ae3a2eebfb98c.In this case, as noted earlier, defendant's presence in the apartment is undisputed and the evidence supports a finding that he, at some point, knew illegal drug activity was conducted therein.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_365.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/365/0215-01; Unicode character offsets [15456:15649] (end exclusive); SHA-256 8371f1741f10e07c9143d36e906600deedd9f497616af5f0247ae3a2eebfb98c.Guzman-Ortiz's only drug-related activity occurred in response to the raid by law enforcement.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_365.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/365/0215-01; Unicode character offsets [13982:14076] (end exclusive); SHA-256 8371f1741f10e07c9143d36e906600deedd9f497616af5f0247ae3a2eebfb98c.There was, however, evidence of his participation in gathering and moving groceries and later dining with Soto-Peguero and Cabral.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_365.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/365/0215-01; Unicode character offsets [14077:14207] (end exclusive); SHA-256 8371f1741f10e07c9143d36e906600deedd9f497616af5f0247ae3a2eebfb98c.The evidence did show that Soto-Peguero spoke with and texted Mejia-Ramos about heroin sales on several occasions during the afternoon and evening of July 6, 2015, but, as noted earlier, there was no testimony that defendant heard or viewed these communications, or had any knowledge thereof.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_365.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/365/0215-01; Unicode character offsets [17014:17306] (end exclusive); SHA-256 8371f1741f10e07c9143d36e906600deedd9f497616af5f0247ae3a2eebfb98c.In sum, no evidence showed defendant's participation or agreement to participate in any drug-related activity except the attempted hiding of a package of heroin in response to the law enforcement raid.Source: docroot/ir/caselaw/f_supp_3d_365.jsonl#/f-supp-3d/365/0215-01; Unicode character offsets [17686:17887] (end exclusive); SHA-256 8371f1741f10e07c9143d36e906600deedd9f497616af5f0247ae3a2eebfb98c. |