United States v. Zavala, 011811 FED11, 09-14804
|Opinion Judge:||PER CURIAM:|
|Party Name:||UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. JOSE MAGANA ZAVALA, JOSE MACIAS MARTINEZ, Defendants-Appellants.|
|Judge Panel:||Before BLACK, MARCUS and WILSON, Circuit Judges.|
|Case Date:||January 18, 2011|
|Court:||United States Courts of Appeals, Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit|
DO NOT PUBLISH
Appeals from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Georgia D. C. Docket No. 07-00279-CR-1-CAP-31
Jose Magana Zavala appeals his convictions and sentences for conspiring to possess with intent to distribute cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846 and 841(b)(1)(A)(ii) (Count 1), conspiring to launder money, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1956(h) (Count 20), and possessing a firearm in furtherance of a drug trafficking crime, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A) (Count 6). Zavala was sentenced to 324 months' imprisonment on Count 1, 240 months' imprisonment on Count 20, to be served concurrently with the sentence on Count 1, and 60 months' imprisonment on Count 6, to be served consecutively with the sentences on Counts 1 and 20, for a total sentence of 384 months' imprisonment. On appeal, Zavala argues that: (1) the entry and search of his residence with an arrest warrant for a third-party suspect, rather than a search warrant for the premises, violated his Fourth Amendment rights; and (2) statutory mandatory minimum sentences in both capital and noncapital cases violate the Eighth Amendment.
In this same case, Jose Macias Martinez appeals his convictions for conspiring to possess with intent to distribute cocaine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846 and 841(b)(1)(A)(ii) (Count 1), and conspiring to launder money, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1956(h) (Count 20). Macias Martinez was sentenced to 292 months' imprisonment on Count 1 and 240 months' imprisonment on Count 20, to be served concurrently, for a total sentence of 292 months' imprisonment. Macias Martinez argues on appeal that the government provided insufficient evidence to convict him because the evidence established only his presence with others who were engaging in criminal conduct. After careful review, we affirm both Zavala's convictions and sentences, and Macias Martinez's convictions.
Review of a denial of a motion to suppress is a mixed question of law and fact. United States v. Delancy, 502 F.3d 1297, 1304 (11th Cir. 2007). The district court's application of the law to the facts, including whether the...
To continue readingFREE SIGN UP