2010 D e c i sion s O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit 3-29-2010 

# U SA v . E ric Rojo P r e c e de nt i al or N on-P r e c e de nt i al : N on-P r e c e de nt i al D ocke t N o . 09-2294

F o llow thi s and a dd it ion al work s at : http://d i git alc ommon s .l a w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2010

Thi s de c i sion i s br ou ght t o you for f r e e and ope n a c c e s s b y the O p inion s of the U nit e d S t at e s C our t of Appe al s for the Thir d C ir c uit at V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. It h as be e n a c c ept e d for inclusion in 2010 D e c i sion s b y an author i z e d a dmini s tr at or of V i ll anova U nive r sity S choo l of L a

w Di git al Reposit ory

. F or mor e inform at ion, p le as e c ont a ct Be n j amin . C arl s on@l a

w . vi ll anova . e du . Re c omme nde d C it at ion " U SA v . E r ic Roj o " (2010). 2010 D e cisio n s . P ape r 1621. http://d i git alc ommon s .l a

w . vi ll anova . e du/thir dc ir c uit_2010/1621NOT P RE CE DE NT I AL UN I TED STATES CO UR T OF A PP EALS F O R T H E T H IR D C IR C U IT N o. 09- 2294 UNI TE D ST ATE S OF AM ERI CA

v . E R IC R O J O , A p p e l l a n t O n A p p ea l from the U n it ed S tat es D istri ct C o u rt

fort he D i s t r i ctof N ew J er s ey ( D . C . C r i m . N o. 2- 07- 00827- 001) H onor abl e Pet erG . Sher i dan, D i s t r i ctJ udge Subm i tt ed Pur s uantt o T hi r d C i r cui tL A R 34. 1( a)

M ar ch 9, 2010 B E FO R E : M C K E E , B A R R Y , and G R E E N B E R G , C i r cui tJ udges

( Fi l ed: M ar ch 29, 2010) OPI NI ON O F THE COURT G R E E N B E R G , C i r cui tJ udge. T hi s m at t ercomes on be for e thi s C our ton an appe al fr om a j udgm entof c o n v ictio n a n d se n ten c e e n ter e d o n A p ril 2 9 , 2 0 0 9 , fo llo w in g d e f e n d a n t-a p p e llan t E ric2

R oj o’ s convi ct i on ata j ur yt r i al and s ubs equents ent enci ng on both count s of a tw o- count in d ictm e n t ch a rg in g h im w ith c o n sp ira c yto d istrib u te a n d p o ss e ss w ith in ten t to d istrib u te 100 gr ams orm or e of a contr ol l ed s ubs t ance ( her oi n) i n vi ol at i on of 21 U . S. C . §§ 841( a) ( 1) and ( b) ( 1) ( B ) and 21 U . S. C . § 846 ( C ountO ne) and di s t r i but i on and pos s es s i on w i t h i nt entt o di s t r i but e 100 gr ams orm or e of a contr ol l ed s ubs t ance ( her oi n) i n vi ol at i on o f 2 1 U .S .C . § § 8 4 1 (a )(1 ) a n d (b )(1 )(B ) (C o u n t T w o ). T h e D istric t C o u rt se n ten c e d R o jo t o concurr entcus t odi al t erm s of 78 m onths on eac h of the tw o count s t o be fol l ow ed by concurr entfour - y eart erm s of s upervi s ed r el eas e. R oj o appea l s , cont endi ng that“the admi s s i on of [Fed. R . E vi d. ] 404( b) evi dence conce r ni ng R oj o’ s al l eged drug pur chas es and us e cons t i tut es r ever s i bl e err or ” and “ i tw as err orforthe D i s t r i ctC our tt o char ge the j ur yon w i l l ful bl i ndnes s . ” A ppel l ant ’ s br . at2. T he D i s t r i ctC our thad j ur i s di ct i on under 18 U . S. C . § 3231 and w e have j ur i s di ct i on under28 U . S. C . § 1291. T h e c a se g re w f

ro m th e re latio n sh ip b e tw e e n R o jo a n d a c o -c o n sp ira to r, A lb e rto V al enci a- M os quer a. T hough onl yR oj o i s an appe l l anti n t hi s cas e, the governm ent or i gi nal l yal s o char ged V al enci a- M os quer a buthe pl eade d gui l t ypur s uantt o an a g re e m e n t w ith th e g o v e rn m e n t a n d te s tif ie d a s a g o v e rn m e n t w itn e s s a t R o jo ’s tr ia l. A c c o rd in g ly, to a la rg e e x te n t th e f a c ts th a t w e d e s c ri b e c o m e f ro m h is te s tim o n y . T he evi dence s how ed thatR oj o and V al enci a- M os quer a, w ho w er e empl oy ed at t he s ame appl i ance s t or e i n N ew Y or k C i t y , had a s oci al r el at i ons hi p dur i ng the cour s e of w h ich V alen cia-M o sq u era , w h o w as a d rug d ea ler, su p p li ed R o jo co ca ine f

o r his u se. In3

J une orJ ul y2006 an under coverpol i ce de t ect i ve w i t h t he J er s eyC i t y , N ew J er s ey , pol i ce depart m ents ol i ci t ed V al enci a- M os quer a t o s el l hi m a ki l ogr am of her oi n. I nas m uch as V al enci a- M os quer a di d nothave a dr i ver ’ s l i cens e and f ear ed fa ci ng di ffi cul t i es i f the p o lice sto p p e d h im w h ile h e w a s d riv in g to a m e e tin g w ith th e p u rc h a se r, h e a sk e d R o jo t o d ri ve h i m t o the m eet i ng . A ccordi ng t o V al encia- M osqu era, he tol d R ojo the p urpose of the meet i ng, and, as an i nducementt o R oj o t o dr i ve hi m t ol d R oj o t hathe w oul d pay hi m $1, 000 i f the tr ans act i on w as compl et ed. R oj o acc ept ed the off erand dr ove V a len c ia- M o sq u e ra to th e m e e tin g w ith th e d e tec tiv e w h ich w a s h e ld a t L ib e rtyS tate Par k. V al enci a- M os quer a r eac hed an a gr eementatthe meet i ng w i t h t he det ect i ve fort he s al e t o hi m of one ki l ogr am of her oi n for$54, 000 ata l at ert i m e. V al enci a- M os quer a s ubs equent l yadvi s ed R oj o t hatthe s al e w oul d be compl et ed t wo d a y s l a t e ra n d a s k e d Ro j o t o t a k e t i me o f

f f r o m w o r k t o d r i v e h i m t o th e me e t i n g . As V al enci a- M os quer a r eques t ed, R oj o dr ove hi m t o t he pl ace of the cont empl at ed t r ans act i on neart he entr ance t o t he H ol l and Tunnel i n N ew J er s ey . B utbefor e theyw ent to th e tu n n e l th e yw e n t to a sto re w h e re V a len c ia- M o sq u e ra o b tain e d a c h ild ’s c a r se a t in w hi ch t o hi de the her oi n. T hen theyw entt o t he tunnel w her e V al enci a- M os quer a mett he det ect i ve w ho, aft erl ooki ng att he her oi n, s i gnal ed forot herpol i ce t o as s i s ti n m aki ng a rr e s ts . V a le n c ia -M o s q u e ra f le d a n d e s c a p e d b u t w a s a p p re h e n d e d a b o u t a y e a r l a te r. T h e p o lice , h o w e v e r, ar re ste d R o jo o n th e sp o t. R o jo testi fied at th e tri al an d ac k n o w ledg ed that h e h ad d ri v en V alen cia-M o sq u era4

t o t he tw o m eet i ngs w e des cr i bed above . B uthe deni ed havi ng anyknow l edge of the drug tr ansact i on and sai d thathe d rove V al encia- M osqu era t o the m eet i ng s as a court esy t o h i m . T herefore, t here w as no real dis pu t e as t o w hat happ ened . R at her, the case cent er ed on w hatR oj o knew of V al enci a- M os quer a’ s deal i ngs w i t h t he det ect i ve. R o jo’s co n tention w ith resp ec t t o R u le 40 4 (b) a ri ses f rom the D istri ct C o u rt ’s ru lin g th a t th e g o v e rn m e n t co u ld a sk V a len c ia- M o sq u e ra a b o u t h is c o c a in e sa les to R o jo t hat w e descri bed abo ve. R ule 404(b) provi des t hat “[e] vidence o f other cr i m es, w rongs, o r a c ts is n o t ad m iss ib le to p ro v e th e c h a ra c ter o f a p e rso n in o rd e r to sh o w a c tio n in conform i t yt her ew i t h. ” Y et , t he court s r egar d R ul e 404( b) as a rul e of i ncl us i on r ather th a n e x c lu sio n , se e U n ited S tate s v . S riyu th , 9 8 F .3 d 7 3 9 , 7 4 5 (3 d C ir. 1 9 9 6 ), w h ich is under s t andabl e bec aus e the rul e pr ovi des thatot hercr i m e evi dence i s admi s s i bl e for num er ous purpos es i ncl udi ng “pr oof of mot i ve, oppor tuni t y , i nt ent , pr epar at i on, pl an, k n o w le d g e , id e n tity, o r a b s e n c e o f m is ta k e o r a c c id e n t.” I ts eems obvi ous t hatV al enci a- M os quer a’ s know l edge thathe and Roj o had engage d i n drug t r ans act i ons , t hough onl yon a per s onal bas i s s o faras R oj o w as conce r ned, m ade Roj o an i deal candi dat e forV al enci a- M os quer a t o as k t o hel p hi m i n t he tr an sac ti o n as R o

jo’s u se o f d rug s su g g ested that h e w o u ld n o t betrayV alen cia-M o sq u era t o t h e p o l i c e . F o rt h a tr e a s o n f r o m Va l e n c i a - M o s q u e r a ’ s p e r s p e c t i v e th e o t h e rc r i me evi dence had a l egi t i m at e purpos e underR ul e 404( b) t o demonstr at e hi s pr epar at i on for th e d ru g tra n sa c tio n a n d th u s b u ttres se d h is c re d ib ili tya s a w itn e ss . V iew in g th e R u le5

4 0 4 (b ) e v id e n c e f

ro m R o jo ’s p e rsp e c tiv e , the e v id e n c e d e m o n stra ted h is in ten t, k n o w led g e , an d a b se n c e o f m ista k e w ith re sp e c t to th e tra n sa c tio n to th e e x ten t th a t it t ended t o r ebutR oj o’ s cl ai m t hathe thoughthe w as on i nnocenterr ands w hen he c h a u f f e u re d V a len c ia- M o sq u e ra to th e m e e tin g s. In th is re g a rd w e p o in t o u t th a t in its char ge att he end of

t he ca s e the D i s t r i ctC our texpl ai ned t o t he j urythatther e had be en t es t i m onyt hatR oj o obt ai ned coc ai ne fr om V al enci a- M os quer a butthati tcoul d “cons i der t hi s evi dence onl yfort he purpos e of de ci di ng w hetherM r . R oj o had the s t at e of mi nd, know l edge, ori nt entnece s s aryt o comm i tthe cr i m e cha r ged i n t he i ndi ctm ent . ” A pp. at 3 6 5 -6 6 . O v e ra ll, w e a re sa tisf ied th a t th e D istric t C o u rt d id n o t ab u se its d isc re tio n in admi t t i ng t he R ul e 404( b) evi dence and thus w e pas s t o t he j uryi ns t ruct i on i s s ue. W e exe r ci s e pl enaryr evi ew w hen det erm i ni ng i f a j uryi ns t ruct i on corr ect l ys t at es t he l aw , and, w hen the i ns t ruct i on pas s es thatthr es hol d r equi r ement , w e r evi ew the di s t r i ctcour t ’ s w or di ng of the i ns t ruct i on foran abus e of di s cr et i on. See U ni t ed St at es v. J i m enez , 513 F. 3d 62, 74- 75 ( 3d C i r . 2008) . O f cour s e, w e r evi ew the evi dence s uppor t i ng t he i ns t ruct i on i n t he l i ghtm os tfavor abl e t o t he governm entas the ver di ct w i nner . See U ni t ed St at es v. W er t - R ui z, 228 F. 3d 250, 255 ( 3d C i r . 2000) . I n i t s w i l l ful bl i ndnes s i ns t ruct i on t he D i s t r i ctC our ti ns t ruct ed the j urythatw her e know l edge of a par t i cul arfac torci r cumst ance i s an es s ent i al partof the off ens e the j urym ayfi nd thatt he defe ndantknew of the fa ctorci r cumst ance i f he “ del i ber at el ycl os ed hi s ey es t o w hat w o u ld o therw ise b e o b v iou s to h im ” a n d that a p erso n ca n n o t “av o id resp o n sibil ityfo r a6

cr i m e bydel i ber at el yi gnor i ng w hati s obvi ous . ” A pp. at357- 58. I n t hi s cas e the ci r cumst ance s w er e s uch thatt her e w as a pos s i bi l i t ythata w i l l ful bl i ndnes s i ns t ruct i on m i ghthave be en appr opr i at e bec aus e ther e i s no ques t i on butthatR oj o as a phy s i cal m at t erpar t i ci pat ed i n t he cr i m es , t hough he cl ai m ed thathi s r ol e i n t he tr ans act i on w as in n o c e n t. N evert hel es s R oj o ar gues t hatthe D i s t r i ctC our ts houl d nothave gi ven the i ns t ruct i on. T o s uppor thi s cont ent i on he i ndi cat es thata w i l l ful bl i ndnes s i ns t ruct i on “mustbe s uppor t ed byevi dence w hi ch demonstr at es s uffi ci ent l ythatthe def endantw as su b jec tiv e lya w a re o f

th e h ig h p ro b a b ili tyo f

th e u n d e rly in g f

a c ts, a n d n o t m e re lyth a t a r eas onabl e man w oul d have be en aw ar e of thatpr obabi l i t y . ” A ppel l ant ’ s br . at31. T he governm ent , how ever , ci t es U ni t ed St at es v. Fl or es , 454 F. 3d 149, 155 ( 3d C i r . 2006) ( i nt ernal quot at i on m arks and ci t at i on om i t t ed) , forthe pr opos i t i on thatthe pr os ecut i on e sta b lish e s th e p re se n c e o f w ill f u l b lin d n e ss “ b yp ro v in g th a t a d e f e n d a n t w a s o b

jec tiv e ly aw ar e of the hi gh pr obabi l i t yof the fa cti n ques t i on, and coul d have r ecogni zed the lik e lih o o d o f

[ illic it a c ts ] ye t d e lib e ra te ly av o id e d le a rn in g th e tru e f a c ts .” W e s ee no ne ed t o focus on the di s t i nct i on, oft en el us i ve i n pr act i ce, betw een s ubj ect i ve and obj ect i ve know l edge. T he i s s ue i s w hether , as R oj o cl ai m s , the “de ci s i on to . . . ins tru c t [ th e ju ryo n w ill f u l b lin d n e ss ] w a s re v e rsib le e rro r b e c a u se th e f a c ts in evidence d i d n ot s up po rt[t he w i l l ful bl i nd ness] charge. ” A pp el l ant’ s br. at31 . T hu s, R oj o does notcont end thatt he D i s t r i ctC our terr ed i n i t s form ul at i on of the w i l l ful7

bl i ndnes s i ns t ruct i on, a det erm i nat i on thatw e w oul d m ake on a n abus e of di s cr et i on bas i s , butr athercont ends t hatt he i ns t ruct i on s houl d nothave be en gi ven i n anyform , an ar gum entt hatr equi r es ourpl enaryr evi ew . H er e the evi dence cl ear l ys uppor t ed a w i l l ful bl i ndnes s i ns t ruct i on. T o s t ar tw i t h ther e i s no es cape fr om the fa ctthatR oj o dr ove V a le n c ia -M o s q u e ra to th e L ib e rt yS ta te P a rk f o r h is f ir s t m e e tin g w ith th e d e te c tiv e . S u re lye v e n if

w e se t as id e V a len c ia- M o sq u e ra ’s te stim o n yth a t h e p ro m ise d to p a yR o jo $1, 000 forhel p i n a s ucce s s ful s al e, t es t i m onythatw oul d s uppor ta convi ct i on w i t hout r el i ance on a w i l l ful bl i ndnes s t heory , i tw oul d be expe ct ed thatR oj o w oul d have a s ked V al enci a- M os quer a t o expl ai n t he purpos e of the tr i p. M or eover , w hen V al enci aM os quer a as ked R oj o t o dr i ve hi m t o t he s econd meet i ng tw o day s l at ernearthe H ol l and T u n n e l, i f

R o jo re m a in e d sile n t as to w h a t w a s h a p p e n in g h e w o u ld h a v e b e e n c lo sin g h is ey es t o t he obvi ous . A ft eral l , t he evi dence demonstr at ed thatR oj o knew thatV al enci aM o s q u e r a wa s a d ru g d e a l e rwh o Ro j o s h o u l d h a v e r e c o g n i z e d f r o m th e c o n d u c tth a twe h a v e d e s c r i b e d w a s l i k e l y t o b e e n g a g e d i n i l l e g a l d ru g a c t i v i t y. F o r th e f o re g o in g re a so n s th e ju d g m e n t o f c o n v ictio n a n d se n ten c e e n ter e d A p ril 29, 2009, w i l l be af

fi r m ed.