Opinion ID: 762536
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Officer Abousamra's Grand Jury Testimony

Text: 94 The government contends that the opinion's characterization of the record as reflecting that Officer Abousamra testified to the grand jury that, as between himself and Officer Quiles, Abousamra had been the first to discover the guns (slip op. 1507), is not an accurate reflection of the proceedings before the grand jury (government motion at 7 (Abousamra was not asked in the grand jury who was the first to discover the guns, and did not answer that he was the first.)). The government states that Abousamra's grand jury testimony can be viewed as giving the misleading impression that the officer found the guns on his initial sweep through the apartment or, in any event, before [Branch] used the bathroom. (Government motion at 8 (emphasis added).) 95 We express no view as to whether the grand jury testimony was misleading; we note that Abousamra testified to the grand jury that before he allowed Branch to use the bathroom he did a security check, and when asked whether he saw anything, he answered affirmatively, saying that he saw the three guns. Given, however, that Abousamra did not use the word first in describing his discovery of the guns to the grand jury, we will grant the government's motion for a modification of the opinion to the following extent. The passage at slip op. page 1507 reading 96 On cross-examination, Abousamra testified that, although his grand jury testimony had been that he had been the first to discover the guns, having seen them during his initial security check of the apartment, in fact it was Quiles who had spied them first: 97 is deleted, and the following is inserted: 98 On cross-examination, Abousamra testified that his grand jury testimony had been that he had seen the guns during his initial security check of the apartment: 99 Q..... 100 A. .... We entered her apartment, and before I let her use the bathroom, I did a quick visual search to make sure everything was okay for my safety. 101 Q. Did you see anything? 102 A. Yes. Right at the opening to the bathroom door there was a shelving unit and there were three guns on the shelving unit. Did you give that testimony? 103 A. Yes, I did. 104 (Feb. 5 Tr. 33-34 (quoting Abousamra's grand jury testimony).) At the suppression hearing, however, Abousamra testified that in fact it was Quiles who had spied the guns first: 105 The government also contends that the opinion unfair[ly] states that Abousamra recanted his grand jury testimony. (Government motion at 9.) Our opinion stated:If Abousamra had testified that he observed the guns in plain view while he was conducting his security sweep of the apartment, which included the path past the hall closet, the district court would have been entitled to find that the government had met its burden. However, while that had been Abousamra's version of the events when he testified before the grand jury, he recanted that testimony at the suppression hearing and testified instead that the first discovery of a firearm was in fact made by Quiles. 106 Slip op. 1513 (emphasis added). The government requests that the language here emphasized be deleted from the opinion. We deny that request. As the quoted portions of the grand jury testimony to be added to the opinion reveal, Abousamra testified to the grand jury that he did his initial security check before allowing Branch to enter the bathroom and saw the guns. He testified before the district court at the suppression hearing that he did not see the guns during his initial security check and that it was Quiles who first saw the guns. We see no error in the opinion and no reason for any other modification of the discussion of the grand jury testimony or the suppression hearing proceedings.