United States v. Leonardo Rabanales-Casia , 586 F. App'x 690 ( 2014 )


Menu:
  •                                                                             FILED
    NOT FOR PUBLICATION                              JUN 12 2014
    MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
    UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS                       U.S. COURT OF APPEALS
    FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,                         No. 13-10031
    Plaintiff - Appellee,               D.C. No. 2:11-cr-01622-DGC-2
    v.
    MEMORANDUM*
    LEONARDO RABANALES-CASIA,
    Defendant - Appellant.
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the District of Arizona
    David G. Campbell, District Judge, Presiding
    Submitted June 10, 2014**
    San Francisco, California
    Before: O’SCANNLAIN, FERNANDEZ, and BEA, Circuit Judges.
    “[V]iewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution,” we
    conclude that a “rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the
    crime beyond a reasonable doubt.” Jackson v. Virginia, 
    443 U.S. 307
    , 319 (1979).
    *
    This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent
    except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
    **
    The panel unanimously concludes this case is suitable for decision
    without oral argument. See Fed. R. App. P. 34(a)(2).
    With respect to Counts I and II, Rabanales-Casia argues that there was insufficient
    evidence to prove a conspiracy or to prove any element of hostage taking. The
    elements of hostage taking are that the defendant: (1) seized or detained another
    person, (2) threatened to kill, injure, or continue detaining that person, and (3) did
    so “in order to compel a third person or a governmental organization to do or
    abstain from doing any act as an explicit or implicit condition for the release of the
    person detained.” 
    18 U.S.C. § 1203
    (a).
    The first element is supported by testimony that the aliens were not allowed
    to leave the house in which they were staying. The second and third elements are
    supported by testimony that Rabanales-Casia threatened to leave aliens “hungry
    and thirsty in a dark room if” their families did not pay money to the smugglers.
    That Rabanales-Casia was part of a conspiracy is supported by testimony that he
    was employed to help collect payments from the aliens’ families.
    With respect to Counts III and IV, Rabanales-Casia argues that there was
    insufficient evidence to prove that he acted for commercial advantage or financial
    gain. But the government presented testimony that Rabanales-Casia was paid for
    his services.
    We also conclude that the district court did not abuse its discretion in
    admitting evidence that a co-defendant raped an alien. That a female alien was
    2
    raped is highly probative of whether aliens were held against their will rather than
    in conditions to which they had consented. Any prejudice was reduced by both a
    limiting instruction and the condition that the government “not elicit the lurid
    details of the rape.” The district court’s decision was within its discretion under
    Federal Rule of Evidence 403.1
    AFFIRMED.
    1
    On appeal, Rabanales-Casia mentions additional reasons that the evidence
    should not have been admitted: (1) it violated Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b), (2)
    it violated his due process rights, and (3) it was disclosed “immediately before
    trial.” Because he did not raise these issues below, we review for plain error. See
    United States v. Sioux, 
    362 F.3d 1241
    , 1244 n.5 (9th Cir. 2004). There was no
    such error in this case. See Johnson v. United States, 
    520 U.S. 461
    , 466–67
    (1997).
    3
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 13-10031

Citation Numbers: 586 F. App'x 690

Judges: Bea, Fernandez, O'Scannlain

Filed Date: 6/12/2014

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/31/2023