Opinion ID: 3058682
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Defendant Alvarado’s Testimony

Text: Testifying in his defense, Defendant Alvarado claimed that he was merely riding as a passenger in Arementa’s vehicle and did not know anything about the cocaine. According to Defendant Alvarado, he met Chino in Texas in late October at a neighbor’s house. Alvarado and Chino agreed to travel together from Texas to North Carolina to find work. They arrived in North Carolina on November 13 or 14, 2010, where Chino introduced Defendant Alvarado to Armenta. Within a few days, the three men decided to return to Texas to pick up a car for Armenta. 1 At trial, Alvarado moved for a judgment of acquittal on both counts after the government’s case-in-chief. The district court denied the motion. 5 On the return trip to North Carolina, Chino told Defendant Alvarado that he wanted Alvarado to go with Armenta to Port Saint Lucie, Florida, and put the car in Alvarado’s name. Alvarado did not agree, but decided to ride with Armenta to Florida. The men arrived back in North Carolina on November 19 and stayed at Armenta’s house. Defendant Alvarado said that he did not see any cocaine and that neither Armenta nor Chino told him they were delivering cocaine to Florida. On November 21, 2010, Armenta drove the Isuzu from North Carolina to Florida. During the drive, Defendant Alvarado spoke with Chino only twice and never spoke to Sanches. Armenta spoke with Chino on his own phone and also on Alvarado’s phone. When the government pointed out that phone records showed that Alvarado was talking to Chino at the same time Armenta was talking to Sanches, Alvarado said that Armenta used Alvarado’s phone on loud speaker while speaking to someone else on his own phone. When they pulled into the McDonald’s parking lot, Armenta told Defendant Alvarado they were stopping to eat. Alvarado claimed he was surprised when they were arrested because he did not know what was going on. Following Alvarado’s testimony, the defense rested and renewed Alvarado’s motion for a judgment of acquittal. The district court again denied the motion. The jury found Alvarado guilty as to Count 2, but did not reach a verdict as to 6 Count 1. The district court declared a mistrial as to Count 1.