Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Ramos-Burciaga

United States District Court, D. New Mexico

April 2, 2018

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff,
v.
DULCE ISABEL RAMOS-BURCIAGA, Defendant.

          MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO COMPEL DISCOVERY

         THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Defendant's Motion to Compel Discovery Pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 16(a)(1)(E)(i) and Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), filed January 24, 2018 (Doc. 36). Having considered the parties' written arguments and applicable law, the Court finds that Defendant's motion is not well-taken and, therefore, is DENIED.

         BACKGROUND

         On August 22, 2017, Defendant was indicted with

unlawfully, knowingly, and intentionally possess[ing] with intent to distribute a controlled substance, 1 kilogram and more of a mixture and substance containing a detectable amount of heroin. In violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(A).

Doc. 12. Neither party describes the facts in the motion or response. It appears that on August 4, 2017, Defendant was arrested by DEA Agent Jarrell Perry, after exiting a Greyhound bus at the downtown Albuquerque Greyhound station. Doc. 25. Agent Perry discovered heroin inside Defendant's handbag, after an allegedly consensual search.

         In her Motion, Defendant requests the following discovery:

a) Any and all material and witnesses Special Agent Perry, or his partner, Agent Pantoja, relied upon, consulted, or otherwise considered in identifying Ms. Ramos-Burciaga as a target of investigation.
b) Any and all information regarding any investigation, information sharing, research, or other data gathering involving Ms. Ramos-Burciaga that preceded the audio-recorded encounter with Special Agent Perry.
c) Any and all information regarding any inspection, search, or screening by the government, or at the behest of the government, of Ms. Ramos-Burciaga's luggage or personal effects, conducted prior to the audio-recorded encounter with Ms. Ramos-Burciaga.
d) The audio-recording of each of Special Agent Perry's other civilian encounters that day that preceded his encounter with Ms. Ramos-Burciaga.
e) The recording of Agent Pantoja's interaction with Ms. Ramos-Burciaga. Agent Pantoja is referred to as Special Agent Perry's partner.
f) The recording of each of Agent Pantoja's other civilian encounters that day that preceded his encounter with Ms. Ramos-Burciaga.

Doc. 36, p.2. Defendant argues that Agent Perry practiced “parallel construction” and used other sources of information not disclosed to target her. Defendant asserts that the above evidence could be material or exculpatory, because it could bear on whether Agent Perry's search was constitutional. Defendant requests that the government put on the record whether any parallel ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.