Opinion ID: 813650
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Relationship between Mr. Burgos and Ramos

Text: Mr. Burgos worked as a uniformed patrol officer for the city of Worcester, Massachusetts. Between 2005 and March 2009, he was assigned to a specific beat known as “Route 13,” which encompasses a high-crime area known as “Main South.”2 In addition to uniformed police officers, members of the Worcester Police Department’s Vice Squad and Gang Unit regularly patrol the area. 1 Because the jury found Mr. Burgos guilty of the charged crime, we view the evidence, and all reasonable inferences therefrom, in the light most favorable to the Government. See, e.g., United States v. Casas, 356 F.3d 104, 126 (1st Cir. 2004). 2 See R.326 at 109. 2 Mr. Burgos’s brother-in-law worked at an automobile repair shop located in Main South, G & V General Auto Repair (“G & V”). Both during and after this time, Rolando Ramos also worked at G & V;3 Ramos was not a mechanic, but rather helped by “taking money . . . [to] the bank,” “pick[ing] up parts that were needed in the shop” and “driving the . . . lift.”4 Mr. Burgos’s brother-in-law described Ramos as “the shop’s tow truck driver.”5 In addition to his legitimate work at G & V, Ramos also ran a marijuana distribution network.6 Although Ramos never met his suppliers at G & V, he did meet with customers and transact sales at that location. Ramos testified that he spoke to at least one of his co-workers at G & V about his illicit drug business,7 but that 3 Ramos’s brother-in-law, Ramon Valerio, owned G & V. 4 R.327 at 85. 5 R.328-1 at 72. 6 Ramos, who testified on behalf of the Government pursuant to a plea agreement, estimated that he distributed approximately 2,500 pounds of marijuana between 2005 and his arrest in March 2009. R.327 at 57-58. During the last five months of the conspiracy, Ramos also began distributing cocaine. Id. at 58. He obtained a total of approximately four kilograms of cocaine, but, when asked how much cocaine he sold, Ramos testified that he “c[ould]n’t say exactly, because [he] was using more than [he] was selling.” Id. 7 See id. at 81. 3 he did not discuss his drug business with, or conduct any sales in the presence of, Mr. Burgos’s brother-in-law.8 While his brother-in-law worked at G & V, Mr. Burgos would go to the garage “very frequent[ly]” to visit and to have his car repaired.9 On one of these occasions, Ramos overheard Mr. Burgos tell his brother-in-law that the area was “hot,” which Ramos took to mean that it was being watched by the police.10 Sometime before April 2006, Mr. Burgos’s brother-in-law stopped working at G & V, and, consequently, Mr. Burgos used G & V less frequently for repairs.11 The mechanics at G & V continued to give Mr. Burgos a discount; however, the extent of the discount varied among the mechanics, who worked on commission and set their own prices for car repair services. Ramos characterized his relationship with Mr. Burgos as a “friendship.”12 Ramos met some members of Mr. Burgos’s family, but never went into his house; the only time that Ramos went to Mr. Burgos’s house was to tow a car. Mr. Burgos never went to 8 See R.328-1 at 43. 9 R.327 at 90. 10 Id. at 94-95. 11 Ramos estimated that Mr. Burgos brought his car in “[a]bout three times” after his brother-in-law left G & V. Id. at 106. Earlier in his testimony, Ramos stated that, after Mr. Burgos’s brother-in-law left G & V, Mr. Burgos brought his car in “[n]ot often, once a year, or once a month depending on what it was.” Id. 12 Id. at 101. 4 Ramos’s house. On one occasion, Ramos helped Mr. Burgos’s sister and her infant son by towing her car and repairing a flat tire, which he did without charging her. The only indication of a personal relationship, rather than a professional relationship, is a phone call from Mr. Burgos to Ramos on Christmas day in 2009.13 On other occasions, Mr. Burgos purchased from Ramos a GPS navigation system for his father and a laptop computer. Ramos sold both items to Mr. Burgos for less than retail price.14 Mr. Burgos also purchased a discounted set of vehicle tire rims at G & V. According to the record, the rims were displayed in the garage with a “for sale” sign on them;15 it is unclear whether Ramos personally was selling the rims or merely rang up the sale as an employee of G & V. In late 2008, Ramos noticed that a police officer who was known to work with the Worcester Police Department’s “Gang unit” was watching G & V through binoculars.16 The next day or so, Ramos told Mr. Burgos that someone was watching the garage, and 13 That phone call was not recorded. 14 Ramos sold the laptop, which he later testified sold for $900 to $1,200 in stores, to Mr. Burgos for $200. Id. at 97. Ramos sold a GPS, which he later testified retailed for “about $129” to Mr. Burgos’s father, although Mr. Burgos conducted the transaction, for $60. Id. at 119. 15 Id. at 99-100. The set of four rims, according to Ramos’s later testimony, retailed for $1,000 to $1,200; Mr. Burgos paid $400 for them. Id. at 99. 16 Id. at 113-14. 5 Mr. Burgos “told [him] that it could be that the place was hot.”17 Ramos understood “hot” to mean that G & V was being watched; he told Mr. Burgos, “I’ll be careful.”18 Ramos later testified that he told his drug customers that he “had the protection of a police officer,” although he did not “mention that person by name.”19 These statements convinced at least one individual that it was safe to purchase marijuana from Ramos. At trial, Ramos disclaimed any truth to these statements: “[W]henever I was high, I was trying to bluff and appear as if I was the king.”20 Ramos characterized his statements as “bragging or gloating” and explained that, contrary to what he told people, he did not “have a cop under [his] wing.”21 After being arrested, Ramos told one of his drug customers, who also had been arrested, that “he d[id]n’t understand why the cop [Mr. Burgos] got arrested with [them].”22 Ramos also testified that he “never” told Mr. Burgos that he was a drug dealer, “never” discussed drugs with 17 Id. at 115. 18 Id. at 116. 19 Id. at 124. 20 Id. Ramos testified that he used narcotics, including cocaine and Percocet, on a daily basis. 21 R.328-1 at 33. 22 Id. at 56; see also id. at 67 (drug customer agreeing that Ramos had stated that he (Ramos) “didn’t know why [Mr. Burgos] got arrested, because [Mr. Burgos] didn’t do anything”). 6 him and did not engage in any drug deals when Mr. Burgos was present because he did not want Mr. Burgos to know about his drug business.23