T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by 9th C i r . R . 36- 3. NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS F O R T H E N IN T H C IR C U IT UN I T E D S T AT E S OF AME R I C A, P l ai nt i ff

- A pp el l ee , v. J ES US VA LE NCI A- RE UV EL TA D e f

e n d a n t - A p p e lla n t, N o. 09- 30286 D . C. N o . CR- 0 8 - 0 5 6 0 3 - TSZ ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt f orthe W e s t e rn D i s tr i c tof W a s hi ngt on T hom a s S . Z i l l y , D i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng A r gue d a nd S ubm i tt e d M a y 7, 2010 S e a tt l e , W a s hi ngt on 

# FI LED MA Y28 2 010 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALST he H onor abl e J a m e s W a r e , U ni t e d S t a t e s D i s tr i c tJ udge f orthe ** N or the rn D i s tr i c tof

C a l i f orni a , s i tt i ng by de s i gna t i on.

2 Be f o r e : W A RD LA W a n d G O U LD , Ci r c u i tJ u d g e s , a n d W A RE , D i stri ctJudg e. ** Je sus V al enci a- R euvel t a app ea l s hi s F ebruary12 , 20 09 conv i ct i on by j ury verdi ctof po ss es si on of m ar i j uana w i th i nt entt o d i stri bu t e, 21 U . S . C . §§ 84 1(a) (1), 841( b) ( 1) ( D ) , a nd 18 U . S . C . § 2, a nd pos s e s s i on of af i r e a rm by a n i l l e ga l a l i e n, 18 U . S . C . §§ 922( g) ( 5) , 924( a ) ( 2) . O n appe a l , V a l e nc i ac ont e nds ( 1) tha the di d not vo l un t ar i l y gi ve consentt o fou r l aw enforc em entoffi ce rs t o searc h a re si dence at 2 3 9 1 7 N o r th w e s t M ap le c r e s t R o a d ( “th e M ap le c r e s t R e s id e n c e ” ) , a n d th a t e v e n if h e h a d v o lu n ta r ily g iv e n c o n s e n t, th e o f f ic e r s ’ s e a r c h e x c e e d e d th e r e a s o n ab le sco p e o f th atco n sen t ; (2 ) th atth e d i stri ctco u rterred w h en i td ecl i n ed t o cl ari fy, u p o n th e ju ry ’s re q u es t, th e m ea n in g o f th e w o rd “i n ten ti o n ” in th e d istrict co u rt’s i ns truc t i on on pos s e s s i on; a nd ( 3) tha tthe di s tr i c tc our tc om m i tt e d pr oc e dur a l e rr or w h en iten h an ce d V alen cia’s G u id elin es o ff en se lev el b y tw o lev els s in ce th e ju ry ’s verdi cton l y a dd re ss ed on e of f ou r f i re arm s f ou nd i n the M apl ec re stR es i dence. W e h a v e ju r is d ic tio n p u r s u a n t to 2 8 U .S .C . § § 1 2 9 1 a n d 1 8 U .S .C . § 3 7 4 2 . W e a f f irm th e c o n v ic tio n , v a c a te th e s e n te n c e , a n d r e m a n d to th e d is tr ic t c o u r t to r e c a lc u la te th e s e n te n c e w ith o u t th e e n h a n c e m e n t f o rp o s s e s s io n o f

m u ltip le fi rearm s.3

A . V ol un t ary C on se ntt o S earc h o f the R es i dence W e r e v ie w th e d is tr ic t c o u r t’s d e n ia l o f am o tio n to s u p p r e s s d e n o v o , U ni ted Stat es v. McW

ee ney , 4 5 4 F .3 d 1 0 3 0 , 1 0 3 3 (9 th C ir. 2 0 0 6 ), an d th e d istrict co u rt’s un derl yi ng fa ctual fi nd i ng thata per son v ol un t ar i l y c on se nt ed t o searc h for cl ea r e rr o r , U ni te d State s v . P atay an Sor i ano , 3 6 1 F .3 d 4 9 4 , 5 0 1 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 4 ) . A lth o u g h aw a rr a n tle s s s e a r c h c o n d u c te d p u r s u a n t to v a lid c o n s e n t is const i tut i on al l y perm i ss i bl e, the go vernm entbear s the bu rden of prov i ng thatsuch c o n s e n t w a s g iv e n f

r e e ly a n d v o lu n ta r ily . Sc h n e c klo th v . B u s ta m o n te , 4 1 2 U . S. 21 8, 22 2 (19 73 ). W e app l y am ul t i -f ac t or fa ct -i nt ensi ve t es tt o d et erm i ne w hether a per son h as gi ven free and v ol un t ary c on se ntt o con du cta s earc h and do no tpl ac e di s pos i t i ve w e i ghton a ny s i ngl e c r i t e r i on. U ni ted Stat es v. P er ez -L op ez , 348 F . 3d 83 9, 84 6 (9th C i r. 20 03 ); U ni ted Stat es v. C orm i er , 22 0 F . 3d 11 03 , 11 12 (9th C i r. 20 00 ). H e r e , th e d is tr ic t c o u r t c r e d ite d th e te s tim o n y o f tw o a g e n ts th a t V a le n c ia re spon ded affi rm at i vel y w hen asked i n h i s nat i ve l angu age w hether he consent ed t o a se ar ch of the M apl ec re stR es i dence. T he di stri ctcourtal so re l i ed on evi dence tha tthe a ge nt s ha d notus e d othe rc oe r c i ve t a c t i c s , s uc h a s dr a w i ng the i rguns or threa t eni ng t o o bt ai n a se ar ch w arrant . F urther e vi dence dem on stra t ed that , af t er r e c e i vi ng Mi r anda w a rn in g s in h is n a tiv e la n g u a g e , V a le n c iav e rb a lly c o n s e n te d toV a l e nc i ac ont e nds tha tthe s e a r c h e xc e e de d the s c ope of a ny c ons e nthe 1 m ayhave gi ven. H ow ever , V al enci a di d n otchal l enge the sc op e of the se ar ch at tr ia l, e x c e p t in ap a s s in g r e f e r e n c e c o n ta in e d in alis tin g o f th e e le m e n ts o f

av a lid c o n s e n s u a l s e a r c h . W e h a v e h e ld o n m u ltip le o c c a s io n s th a t “ju s t a s f a ilu r e to f

ile atim e ly m o tio n to s u p p r e s s e v id e n c e c o n s titu te s aw a iv e r , s o to o d o e s af a ilu r e to ra i se a part i cul argrou nd i n sup po rtof a m ot i on t o sup pres s. ” E . g. , U ni ted Stat es v. Mu r illo , 2 8 8 F .3 d 1 1 2 6 , 1 1 3 5 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 2 ) . T h u s , w e c o n c lu d e th a t V a le n c ia ha s w a i ve d a ny c ha l l e nge t o the va l i di ty of the s c ope of

the s e a r c h. 4 c o n tin u e th e s e a r c h a f

te rg u n s a n d m a r iju a n aw e r e f o u n d , a lth o u g h h e d e c lin e d to s i gn aw r i tt e n c ons e ntf

orm . B e c aus e the r e w a s pe r s ua s i ve e vi de nc e s uppor t i ng a f in d in g o f v o lu n ta ry c o n s e n t, w e a f f irm th e d is tr ic t c o u r t’s d e n ia l o f th e m o tio n to supp re ss evi dence gl ea ned from the se ar ch of the M apl ec re stR es i dence. 1 B . F a i l ur e t o G i ve C l a r i f y i ng J ury I ns truc t i on W e r e vi e w adi s tr i c tc our t ’ s r e s pons e t o aj ury que s t i on f orabus e of d is c r e tio n . A r i

z ona v . J ohns on , 3 5 1 F .3 d 9 8 8 , 9 9 3 ( 9 th C ir . 2 0 0 3 ) . W e h a v e h e ld tha t“ w he n aj ury m a ke s e xpl i c i ti t s di f f i c ul t i e s by , f

ore xa m pl e , a s ki ng aque s t i on, the tri al courtshou l d cl ea r the j ury’ s di ff i cul t i es aw ayw i th con cr et e a cc urac y. ” I d. a t 9 9 4 . H o w e v e r , “th e p r e c is e m a n n e rb y w h ic h th e c o u r t f u lf ills th is o b lig a tio n is a m att ercom m i tt ed t o i t s di sc re t i on . ” I d. A d is tr ic t c o u r t d o e s n o t ab u s e its di s c r e t i on s i m pl y be c aus e i tr e f e r s the j ury ba c k t o the i ns truc t i ons the y ha d a l r e a dy b e e n g iv e n . I

d. a t995.5

H e r e , the j ury ’ s r e que s tf orc l a r i f i c a t i on of

the w or d “ i nt e nt i on” i n the c our t ’ s i ns truc t i on on pos s e s s i on di d noti ndi c a t e a ny a c tua l m i s unde r s t a ndi ng of the e l e m e nt s ne c e s s a ry t o c onvi c tV a l e nc i a . B e c aus e the w or d i nt e nt i on w a s m e a nt to c arry its o r d in a ry m e a n in g , a n y d a n g e rth a t th e ju ry w o u ld f a il to c o rr e c tly i nt e rpr e tthe t e rm w a s ne gl i gi bl e . F ortha tr e a s on, V a l e nc i a ’ s pr opos a l t o pr ovi de the j ury w i th ade f

i ni t i on of i nt e ntt a ke n f

r om W a s hi ngt on C r i m i na l I ns truc t i on 10 . 01 w ou l d n othave cl ar i fi ed the ori gi nal i nstruct i on bu tra ther w ou l d h ave a dd ed n e w a n d in c o rr e c t e le m e n ts to th e p o s s e s s io n c h a r g e , f u r th e rc o n f

u s in g th e ju ry . T h u s , w e c o n c lu d e th a t th e d is tr ic t c o u r t d id n o t ab u s e its d is c r e tio n w h e n it de c l i ne d t o f

ur the rc l a r i f

y the m e a ni ng of

the w or d i nt e nt i on i n r e s pons e t o the ju ry ’s r e q u e s t. C. Se n t e n c e En h a n c e me n tf o rM u l t i p l e Fi r e a rms W e r evi ew “ the di stri ctcourt ’ s i nt erpret at i on of the S ent enci ng G ui del i nes de novo, the di s tr i c tc our t ’ s appl i c a t i on of the S e nt e nc i ng G ui de l i ne s t o the f a c t s of thi s c as e f

or abuse of di sc re t i on , and the di stri ctcourt ’ s f ac tual fi nd i ng s f

or cl ea r error. ” U

ni te d State s v . Stote r au , 524 F . 3d 988, 997 ( 9th C i r . 2008) . “ T he gove rnm e ntbe a r s the bur de n of pr ovi ng, by apr e ponde r a nc e of the e vi de nc e , the fa ct s nec es saryt o enh ance a def endant ’ s off

ense l evel un der the G ui del i nes. ” U n ite d S ta te s v . G u z m a n -M

a ta , 57 9 F . 3d 10 65 , 10 72 (9th C i r. 20 09 ).6

T he G ui del i nes provi de thati f an o ff ense i nv ol ved b etw ee n three and seven f ir e a rm s , atw o - le v e l in c r e a s e in th e o f f e n s e le v e l is ap p r o p r ia te . U .S .S .G . § 2K 2. 1( b) ( 1) ( A ) . T he A ppl i c a t i on N ot e t o S e c t i on 2K 2. 1( b) ( 1) s t a t e s : “ F or p u rp o s e s o f

c a lc u la tin g th e n u m b e ro f f ir e a rm s u n d e rs u b s e c tio n ( b ) ( 1 ) , c o u n t o n ly thos e f i r e a rm s tha tw e r e unl a w f ul l y s oughtt o be obt a i ne d, unl a w f ul l y pos s e s s e d, or u n la w f u lly d is tr ib u te d . . . .” H e r e , th e j u ry b a s e d i t s v e r d i c to n V a l e n c i a ’ s p o s s e s s i o n o f o n l y o n e f

i r e a rm, a . 38 0 sem i -aut om at i c handg un . E vi dence attri al show ed thatthree addi t i on al f i r e a rm s w e r e f

ound i n the s e a r c h of

the M apl e c r e s tR e s i de nc e : a. 9m m ha ndgun a n d a1 2 - g au g e s h o tg u n in th e c o n v e r te d a ttic b e d r o o m , a n d a.2 2 c a lib e rr if le in th e g a r a g e . H o w e v e r , th e e v id e n c e s tr o n g ly in d ic a te d th a t s e v e r a l o th e rin d iv id u a ls w e r e l i vi ng i n the s a m e r e s i de nc e . I n f a c t , the pa s s por t , s oc i a l s e c ur i ty c a r d, a nd t e m por a ry dr i ve r ’ s l i c e ns e of ape r s on na m e d J a i r o A r e va l os S i l vaw e r e f ound i n a bl a c k duf

f e l ba g i n the c onve r t e d a tt i c be dr oom c l os e t o the . 9m m ha ndgun. T he a ge nt s a l s o di s c ove r e d tha tM r . S i l vaw a s the ow ne rof the r e d pi c kup truc k f

ound i n the garage near the . 22 ca l i ber r i fl e. W e h o ld th a t V a le n c ia ’s m e r e p r o x im ity to th e a d d itio n a l f ir e a rm s a n d h is p resen ce o n th e p ro p erty w h ere th ey w ere fo u n d i s i n su ffi ci en tt o est ab l i sh c o n s tru c tiv e p o s s e s s io n . See U ni ted Stat es v. C arrasc o , 2 5 7 F .3 d 1 0 4 5 , 1 0 4 9 ( 9 th7

C i r . 2001) . V a l e nc i a ’ s c l a i m of a n ow ne r s hi p i nt e r e s ti n the r e d pi c kup truc k, w hi ch coul d con ce i vabl y c on necthi m t o the . 22 ca l i ber r i fl e f ou nd i n the garage, c a n o n ly s u p p o r t af

in d in g o f p o s s e s s io n o f

o n e a d d itio n a l f

ir e a rm , w h ic h f

a lls s hor tof the thr e e f

i r e a rm s ne e de d t o a dd the tw o- l e ve l i nc r e a s e unde rthe S en t en ci n g G u i d el i n es. In l i gh tof the pauci ty of the evi dence, w e c on cl ud e thatthe di stri ctcourt cl earl y e rr ed by fi nd i ng thatV al enci a e xerc i se d d om i ni on or control ov erthe three addi t i on al fi re arm s and thu s abu se d i t s di sc re t i on by addi ng a s ent ence en h an ce m en t u n d erS ec ti o n 2 K 2 .1 (b )( 1 )( A ). A cc o rd in g ly, w e v ac ate V alen cia’s s e nt e nc e a nd r e m a nd t o the di s tr i c tc our tt o r e c a l c ul a t e the s e nt e nc e w i thoutthe tw o-l eveli ncre as e. C O N VI C TI O N A FFI R M ED . SEN TEN C E VA C A TED . R EM A N D ED F OR RE S E NT E NCI NG.