Case Title: Ex parte Carlos Hernandez. PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI TO THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS (In re: Carlos Hernandez v. State of Alabama) (Jefferson Circuit Court: CC-10-904; Criminal Appeals : CR-11-1732). Writ Denied. No Opinion.

Citation: 

Docket Number: 1120958

State: alabama

Court: Alabama Supreme Court

Date: 2013-09-27T00:00:00Z

Document:
Rel: 09/27/2013
Notice: This opinion is subject to formal revision before publication in the advance
sheets of Southern Reporter.  Readers are requested to notify the Reporter of Decisions,
Alabama Appellate Courts, 300 Dexter Avenue, Montgomery, Alabama 36104-3741 ((334) 229-
0649), of any typographical or other errors, in order that corrections may be made before
the opinion is printed in Southern Reporter.
SUPREME COURT OF ALABAMA
SPECIAL TERM, 2013
____________________
1120958
____________________
Ex parte Carlos Hernandez
PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI
TO THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS
(In re: Carlos Hernandez
v.
State of Alabama)
(Jefferson Circuit Court, CC-10-904;
Court of Criminal Appeals, CR-11-1732)
PARKER, Justice.
WRIT DENIED.  NO OPINION.
Stuart, Bolin, Murdock, Shaw, Main, Wise, and Bryan, JJ.,
concur.  
Moore, C.J., dissents.
1120958
MOORE, Chief Justice (dissenting).
I respectfully dissent from the denial of Carlos
Hernandez's petition for a writ of certiorari. 
Having 
reviewed
the unpublished memorandum of the Court of Criminal Appeals
upholding Hernandez's conviction, Hernandez v. State (No. CR-
11-1732, April 26, 2013), ___ So. 3d ___ (Ala. Crim. App.
2013) (table), and the facts presented in Hernandez's
petition, I am not convinced that the State presented
sufficient evidence from which a rational jury could find
Hernandez guilty beyond a reasonable doubt of knowingly
trafficking in 10 or more kilograms of cocaine. 
 The federal Drug Enforcement Administration arranged for
an informant to deliver 15 kilograms of cocaine to Hernandez
in the parking lot of the Flying J truck stop in Birmingham.
Federal agents recorded video and audio of the delivery.
Hernandez received a closed suitcase from the 
informant, 
which
he put unopened into the trunk of his car. Several blocks away
local police stopped Hernandez, seized the suitcase, and
arrested him. A jury convicted him of trafficking in 10 or
more kilograms of cocaine. The trial court imposed a mandatory
sentence of life imprisonment without parole.
2
1120958
Section 13A-12-231(2), Ala. Code 1975, provides that a
person knowingly in possession of 10 kilograms or more of
cocaine "shall be sentenced to a mandatory term of
imprisonment of life without parole." The audio transcript
(translated from Spanish) of the controlled delivery does not
contain any dialogue with Hernandez referring to cocaine or
using a code word for cocaine. The only passage about quantity
is the following dialogue between Hernandez and the informant
or confidential source:
"CS: Here. There is the f[____] luggage.
"CARLOS: Yes, How much is it?
"CS: Uh, he said that it was 15."
This brief dialogue in my view is insufficient to prove
beyond a reasonable doubt that Hernandez knowingly possessed
10 or more kilograms of cocaine. Notably, he never opened the
suitcase. Because the informant did not testify at the trial
nor was the informant's identity disclosed to the defense, the
only evidence of Hernandez's knowledge of the contents of the
suitcase is the audiotape of the controlled delivery. "The
test to be applied [in reviewing a conviction based on
circumstantial evidence] is whether the jury might reasonably
3
1120958
find that the evidence excluded every reasonable hypothesis
except that of guilt ...." Cumbo v. State, 368 So. 2d 871, 874
(Ala. Crim. App. 1978). From the evidence presented, the jury
would have to speculate that Hernandez knew the suitcase
contained cocaine without having any evidence before it to
that effect. "[M]ere speculation, conjecture, or surmise that
the accused is guilty of the offense charged does not
authorize a conviction." Thomas v. State, 363 So. 2d 1020,
1022 (Ala. Crim. App. 1978). 
For the above reasons, I would grant the petition for a
writ of certiorari to examine the record on the question of
whether a rational jury could conclude beyond a reasonable
doubt from the evidence presented at trial that Hernandez knew
that the suitcase he had received from the informant contained
10 or more kilograms of cocaine.
4