Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca10-91-02248/USCOURTS-ca10-91-02248-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Placido Padilla
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

't 

I 

L .J 

UNITED STATES COURT 

'F l e<>~tt ot A'P1ll8-\" 

United s,~h Circu\t 

OF APPEALS 

FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT 

oEC o 4. ,gst 

noBERT L. ROECKER 

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

Plaintiff-Appellee, 

v. 

PLACIDO PADILLA, 

Defendant-Appellant. 

~ · Clerk 

Nos. 91-2248, 92-2014 

(D.C. No. CR-91-337-01-SC) 

(D. New Mexico) 

ORDER AND JUDGMENT* 

Before MOORE and BRORBY, Circuit Judges, and THEIS, District 

Judge.** 

Placido Padilla appeals his conviction and sentence under 21 

u.s.c. §§ 841(a) (1) and 841(b) (1) (C) for distributing less than 

500 grams of cocaine on three separate occasions. He questions 

*This order and judgment has no precedential value and shall not 

be cited, or used by any court within the Tenth Circuit, except 

for purposes of establishing the doctrines of the law of the case, 

res judicata, or collateral estoppel. 10th Cir. R. 36.3. 

**The Honorable Frank G. Theis, Senior Judge for the United States 

District Court for the District of Kansas, sitting by designation. 

Appellate Case: 91-2248 Document: 010110149256 Date Filed: 12/04/1992 Page: 1 
the denial of a motion to suppress, the assistance of counsel, and 

the sufficiency of the evidence. None of his arguments have 

merit; therefore, we affirm. 

The motion to suppress related to tapes of conversations 

between defendant and New Mexico State Police Agent Cortez 

regarding the purchase of cocaine. Because the agent was a party 

to the conversations, the interceptions were proper. 18 U.S.C. 

§ 2511(2) (c); United States v. Caceres, 440 U.S. 741, 749-50 

(1979). Mr. Padilla's argument ignores the applicable statute and 

is frivolous. 

Mr. Padilla argues he was denied effective assistance of 

counsel at trial. We have held this issue is not cognizable on 

direct appeal. Beaulieu v. United States, 930 F.2d 805, 806 (10th 

Cir. 1991). We see nothing in the arguments indicating this is 

one of the rare cases in which departure from that rule is 

required. 

Mr. Padilla's argument regarding the sufficiency of the 

evidence is unpersuasive. Viewing the evidence in a light most 

favorable to the government, as we must, we think Mr. Padilla's 

conversations with Agent Cortez, and, in particular, his own 

statements to Agent Cortez that he wanted $1,100 for each ounce of 

cocaine that he was selling; the expert testimony about the nature 

of the substance he sold; the evidence of Mr. Padilla's evasive 

actions; and the counter-surveillance at the time of his meetings 

-2-

Appellate Case: 91-2248 Document: 010110149256 Date Filed: 12/04/1992 Page: 2 
with Agent Cortez all provide an adequate basis for Mr. Padilla's 

conviction. 

AFFIRMED. 

Entered for the Court 

John P. Moore 

Circuit Judge 

-3-

Appellate Case: 91-2248 Document: 010110149256 Date Filed: 12/04/1992 Page: 3