576 F.2d 238 (9th Cir. 1978), 76-2150, United States v. Kazni

Docket Nº:76-2150.
Citation:576 F.2d 238
Party Name:UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Rajeh KAZNI, Defendant-Appellant.
Case Date:June 05, 1978
Court:United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit
 
FREE EXCERPT

Page 238

576 F.2d 238 (9th Cir. 1978)

UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee,

v.

Rajeh KAZNI, Defendant-Appellant.

No. 76-2150.

United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit

June 5, 1978

Page 239

        David F. Stobaugh (argued), of Bendich, Stobaugh & Strong, Seattle, Wash., for defendant-appellant.

        Richard R. Romero, Asst. U. S. Atty. (argued), Los Angeles, Cal., for plaintiff-appellee.

        Appeal from the United States District Court for the Central District of California.

        Before TUTTLE [*], GOODWIN and SNEED, Circuit Judges.

        TUTTLE, Circuit Judge:

        On August 14, 1975, Rajeh Kazni and Roberto Durand Wayar were indicted for possession of cocaine with intent to distribute, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1). 1 Durand pleaded guilty. Kazni, the appellant here, waived his right to a jury and proceeded to trial before the court. He was convicted and sentenced to a term of 8 years in prison. On appeal, Kazni contends he did not receive effective assistance of counsel at his trial and that the introduction of certain alleged hearsay evidence deprived him of his Sixth Amendment right of confrontation. 2 We affirm.

Page 240

        During the spring of 1975, one Walter Souto, while operating as a DEA informant in Argentina, South America, met and gained the confidence of Jorge Exeni, the appellant's cousin, and the Durand brothers, Roberto, Sergio and Joaquin. Souto told the Argentinians he was involved in the narcotics trade and that he had a buyer in Los Angeles. After learning that Exeni and Sergio Durand had plans to transport some 11 kilos of cocaine to the United States, Souto agreed to assist in the reprocessing 3 and ultimate sale of the narcotics.

        Souto planned to fly from Argentina to Los Angeles on August 7, 1975. Prior to Souto's departure, Exeni called appellant in Los Angeles. At trial Souto testified, over objection, as to what Exeni said after the phone conversation with appellant:

Q: What did he tell you?

A: Well, he told me that, in fact, he was worried about some money getting to Durand for this operation. And he also wanted me to get in touch with his cousin in order to sell the stuff and get his money covered by warranty by his cousin Rajeh.

Q: Did he say what his cousin had told him on the phone call?

A: Yeah. He said not to worry about the money. He has located Durand here in Los Angeles and he was safe covering the money. . . .

        In addition, Exeni wrote two letters in Souto's presence. Souto was instructed to deliver one of the letters, which was written in Arabic, to appellant. At trial, appellant interpreted the letter as follows:

My dear Rajeh, the one who handled this letter is a close friend of mine and he will tell you about what is happened between one and Durand brother and how much they should pay me, how much they owe me, something like that. And this man he could sell everything they got and have some people they buy it and give him cash. If they do want agree with him, they should send telegram to me and let me know and I will go there myself. And whenever this man when he does everything, he should pay me half the profit and nothing else. With peace or your cousin forever, your cousin Jorge Exeni. The end of the letter he say you shouldn't do nothing and don't tell Durand, you know, about everything. I am afraid they are not going to pay me. ( 4)

        The envelope containing this letter bore appellant's name and phone number.

        Upon his arrival in Los Angeles, Souto checked into a motel and attempted to make contact with appellant. Souto finally reached appellant by telephone on Sunday, August 10, 1975, and informed him that "I (am the) person mentioned by (Exeni) by telephone." Appellant replied that he had been "waiting" and asked, "you want to meet Durand now?". Souto opted to meet only with appellant. After appellant arrived at the motel, Souto produced the Arabic letter, which appellant read and threw away. At trial Souto testified about appellant's reaction to the letter:

(H)e mentioned there was no problem about his cousin's money because he was

Page 241

taken care of it. And also he mentioned that it was he wasn't afraid of losing the money because he was able to solve the problem by getting someone to kill Durand if he didn't want to pay. . . .

        After the letter had been delivered and read, appellant and Souto conversed about Exeni's "business." Souto told appellant that he was involved in a cocaine operation with Exeni and that Roberto Durand owed Exeni $10,000 from a prior cocaine deal. Appellant testified with respect to what else Souto said during this conversation:

A: And he (Souto) is here to sell the coke. And the way he put it like he is going to screw Roberto and take the money and go back to Argentina and for me I am not supposed to tell Robert anything, leave everything for him. Just locate Robert for him.

Q: So you are to help out Exeni through (Souto), right?

A: Yes.

        Finally, appellant mentioned to Souto that he knew Durand had some cocaine and that "the quality of the stuff wasn't very good." 5

        Later in the day, Souto and appellant met at appellant's apartment and discussed "the quality of the dope." Appellant showed Souto a quantity of cocaine previously obtained from Durand and stated that he planned to purchase part of Durand's cocaine to sell himself. The two finally were joined by Roberto Durand, and they all discussed how to "remake" the cocaine. Appellant conceded at trial that during this conversation he agreed to obtain several glass jars needed for reprocessing. 6 In addition, appellant volunteered to obtain a secluded location for use during the second stage of the process.

        The next day, August 11, Souto, Durand and appellant met for lunch and discussed their respective roles in the reprocessing operation. Souto was to provide the necessary chemicals. Appellant agreed to pay for half of the chemicals, to obtain the glass jars and to secure a location for phase two of the operation. Durand was to supply the cocaine and "work on the chemistry." Souto informed appellant and Durand later that day that he would fly to San Diego to obtain the chemicals.

        A portion of the chemicals arrived on Thursday, August 14. 7 Souto, Durand and appellant met at Souto's motel. The chemicals were loaded into Durand's vehicle, and the three men proceeded to Durand's apartment. DEA agents on...

To continue reading

FREE SIGN UP