|
|
| Court To Hear Case Involving Drug Smuggling |
|
Posted by CN Staff on May 28, 2002 at 12:22:33 PT By Gina Holland, Associated Press Writer Source: Associated Press 
The Supreme Court agreed Tuesday to review a ruling that questions the way the government catches and charges suspected drug dealers and terrorists. The case, stemming from narcotics arrests of two immigrants near an Idaho mall, is the first with implications for terrorism to catch the court's interest since Sept. 11. The Bush administration played up the issue in urging the court to intervene. The government lost in a lower court and will get to argue for a reversal in the court term that begins next fall. The case revolves around prosecutors' use of conspiracy charges for crimes that have already been discovered and prevented by law officers. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals, in a string of cases dating back five years, has said that law officers cannot stop a crime, lure people into getting involved with the help of informants, then charge them with being part of the conspiracy. That's what the appeals court said happened to Francisco Jimenez Recio and Adrian Lopez-Meza when they were arrested during a sting operation involving a flatbed truck loaded with about $12 million worth of cocaine and marijuana. Officers had seized the truck and arrested a driver and companion near Las Vegas in 1997. With the companion's help, lawmen set up the sting operation at a mall in Nampa, Idaho. Recio and Lopez-Meza were arrested after showing up at the mall to get the truck. The 9th Circuit said Recio and Lopez-Meza would likely not have been involved in the conspiracy had they not been lured into it. The court said the government did not prove any other involvement in a conspiracy. Solicitor General Theodore Olson told the Supreme Court in a filing that the appeals court finding "exonerates culpable defendants and needlessly complicates the prosecution of conspiracy cases." "The vital need for undercover government efforts both to apprehend conspirators and to prevent their planned offenses from actually occurring extends far beyond drug cases. Similar legitimate law enforcement tactics are crucial in violent crime, terrorism and other contexts," Olson wrote. The two men had received prison sentences of more than 10 years. Recio also was convicted of possession of drugs with intent to distribute, a conviction the 9th Circuit left undisturbed. Thomas A. Sullivan, the attorney for the two, told the court that prosecutors did not have enough evidence for a conspiracy charge. He said they could pursue a similar charge against Lopez-Meza. "There is no crisis of law here," he wrote in court papers. The men were wearing pagers and had calling cards when they were arrested, the chief evidence against them. The man who was cooperating with authorities had never met the two. The San Francisco-based appeals court speculated that they could be drivers hired at the last minute with no involvement in a conspiracy. Olson said it should not matter if the government intervenes during a crime. He said under the standard of the appeals court, officers who fear compromising prosecutions would have to be careful in stopping crimes. The case is United States v. Recio, 01-1184 Complete Title: Court To Hear Case Involving Drug Smuggling and Terrorism Source: Associated Press CannabisNews Justice Archives Home Comment Email Register Recent Comments Help |
 |
| Post Comment |  |
 |  |