United States v. Martin Cardenas, A/K/A Raul Ramirez
864 F.2d 1528 (1989)
Premium Feature
Subscribe to Lexplug to listen to the Case Podcast.
Rule of Law:
Under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c), a person "carries" a firearm in a vehicle if they have constructive possession of it, meaning the power to exercise dominion and control, even if it is not on their person. Deficiencies in the chain of custody for physical evidence go to the weight of the evidence for the jury, not its admissibility, provided the court finds it reasonably probable that the evidence has not been materially altered.
Facts:
- Lawrence Villas, who was under investigation for drug trafficking, arranged to sell cocaine to undercover police officers on behalf of his supplier, Julian Rivera-Chacon.
- On July 9, 1987, Martin Cardenas drove Rivera-Chacon in his truck to a hotel parking lot to conduct the prearranged drug transaction.
- Villas acted as the go-between, taking a sample of cocaine from Rivera-Chacon to the undercover officers in a hotel room.
- Following the exchange of the sample, police officers moved in and arrested Cardenas, Rivera-Chacon, and Villas in the parking lot.
- During a search of the truck Cardenas was driving, Officer Garcia found a .25 caliber handgun in an open dashboard compartment on the driver's side, inches from where Cardenas was sitting.
- Officer Garcia also found a brown paper bag under the truck's front seat, which contained a plastic sack of a white substance later identified as cocaine.
- Garcia handed both the gun and the bag containing the cocaine to another officer, Officer Gunter.
- Officer Gunter, who had sole physical custody of the evidence for a period and was the only person with it when he took it to the evidence room, committed suicide a month before the trial.
Procedural Posture:
- Martin Cardenas was indicted along with Julian Rivera-Chacon in the United States District Court for the District of New Mexico on drug and firearm charges.
- A jury in the trial court returned guilty verdicts on all counts against Cardenas.
- Cardenas appealed his convictions to the United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, arguing that the cocaine evidence was improperly admitted and that there was insufficient evidence to support the firearm convictions.
Premium Content
Subscribe to Lexplug to view the complete brief
You're viewing a preview with Rule of Law, Facts, and Procedural Posture
Issue:
Does the term 'carries' a firearm under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) require the weapon to be on the defendant's person, or is constructive possession of a firearm within a vehicle sufficient to satisfy the element?
Opinions:
Majority - Brorby, J.
No. The term 'carries' a firearm under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c) does not require that the weapon be physically on the defendant's person; constructive possession within a vehicle is sufficient. The court first addressed the chain of custody issue with the cocaine, holding that imperfections in the chain, such as the unavailability of an officer (Gunter) or the absence of the paper bag the cocaine was found in, go to the weight of the evidence for the jury to consider, not its admissibility. So long as the trial court finds a reasonable probability that the evidence has not been materially altered, it is admissible. The court then addressed the definition of 'carries' under § 924(c) as an issue of first impression. It rejected Cardenas's argument that 'carrying' requires the firearm to be on one's person or in one's clothing. Examining the legal consensus at the time the statute was enacted, the court concluded that when a vehicle is used, the vehicle itself is the means of carrying. The key distinction between prohibited 'carrying' and mere 'transportation' is the element of possession—the knowing power to exercise dominion and control over the firearm. Because the gun was in an open compartment within Cardenas's effortless reach, he had constructive possession and was therefore 'carrying' the firearm in relation to a drug trafficking crime.
Analysis:
This decision significantly clarifies two evidentiary and statutory interpretation issues in the Tenth Circuit. By reinforcing that chain of custody defects affect evidentiary weight rather than admissibility, the court maintains a practical standard for prosecutors. More importantly, the case establishes a broad interpretation of 'carries' under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c), setting a key precedent that having a firearm accessible within a vehicle during a relevant crime is sufficient for conviction. This interpretation expands the statute's applicability beyond physical, on-person possession, making it a more potent tool for prosecutors in cases involving firearms in vehicles used for drug trafficking or violent crimes.
