Opinion ID: 28775
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: When asked for identification, Saucedo-

Text: State troopers Ruben Garcia and Ethan Up- Munoz produced a New Mexico identification shaw stopped to assist two stranded motorists card bearing the name Jehova Miranda. The standing next to a pickup truck with its hood other man produced a border crossing card raised and gas tank opened. An empty gas jug bearing the name Gerardo Saucedo-Diaz. lay next to the truck. Saucedo-Munoz then asked the officers for a ride to a gas station to buy more gas. The two men told Garcia they were out of gas. When Garcia asked where they had last During the trip to the station, Saucedorefueled, they said they had done so in Van Munoz, Garcia, and Upshaw conversed. SauHorn with nine dollars worth of gas. Garcia cedo-Munoz stated that he had met Saucedofound this suspicious, because he knew Van Diaz four years earlier at a bar in Juarez. GarHorn was 108 miles away; he would not have cia observed that, according to Saucedo-Diexpected a pickup truck to run out of gas after az’s identification, Saucedo-Diaz would have traveling such a short distance. Garcia then been fourteen years old at that time, too young asked whether the truck’s gas gauge worked, to be in a bar. Saucedo-Munoz initially had and the men replied that it did not. This fur- difficulty explaining this apparent discrepancy ther aroused Garcia’s suspicion, because he but finally explained that people in Mexico go knew from experience and training that a ve- to bars at young ages. hicle’s gas gauge usually will not work if the gas tank is loaded with contraband. Garcia At the station, Saucedo-Munoz purchased testified that both men seemed nervous and a gas jug after realizing that he had left his 2 empty jug behind at the truck. When they ar- III. rived back at the truck, Saucedo-Munoz filled Saucedo-Munoz argues that the district the truck with the gas and asked the officers to court improperly instructed the jury regarding follow him and Saucedo-Diaz to a nearby gas deliberate ignorance.1 The deliberate ignorstation. After the officers followed them to a ance instruction is used “to inform the jury that station in Pyote, Saucedo-Munoz paid the at- it may consider evidence of the defendant’s tendant and filled the tank with only three dol- charade of ignorance as circumstantial proof of lars worth of gas before the pump stopped. guilty knowledge.” United States v. Wells, 262 F.3d 455, 465 (5th Cir. 2001) (citation Saucedo-Munoz acted surprised and at- and internal quotati on omitted). The intempted to blame the problem on the station’s struction allows the jury to convict without pump, which he claimed was broken. When finding that the defendant actually was aware Upshaw observed that Saucedo-Munoz had of the existence of illegal conduct. United paid the attendant only three dollars, Saucedo- States v. Cartwright, 6 F.3d 294, 301 (5th Cir. Munoz paid another seven dollars. After six 1993). dollars of gas were put into the truck, the tank would take no more. Both men were placed Where, as here, the mens rea required for under arrest. conviction is that the defendant acted “know- ingly” or “intentionally,” a deliberate ignorance The truck was taken to a wrecking yard, instruction creates a risk that the jury might where a drug dog alerted to the vehicle. Gar- convict for negligence or stupidity. Id. cia observed that the gas gauge was broken. (citations omitted). The deliberate ignorance The truck was placed on a hydraulic lift, and instruction “should only be given when a the officers noted that there were fresh defendant claims a lack of guilty knowledge scratches on the bolts and screws holding the and the poof at trial supports an inference of tank in place. Saucedo-Munoz threatened to deliberate indifference.” Wells, 262 F.3d at sue if nothing was discovered. After removing the tank, the officers discovered forty-three bundles of cocaine and marihuana inside. 1 The deliberate ignorance charge read as follows: