People v. Carrasco CA2/8
Filed 8/11/14 P. v. Carrasco CA2/8 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA
SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT
DIVISION EIGHT
THE PEOPLE, B249070
Plaintiff and Respondent, (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BA389434-02) v.
MARIA GUADALUPE CARRASCO,
Defendant and Appellant.
APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. David V. Herriford, Judge. Affirmed as modified.
Michele W. Flynn, under appointment by the Court of Appeal, for Defendant and Appellant.
No appearance for Plaintiff and Respondent.
___________________________________
Maria Carrasco appeals from a judgment which sentences her to six years in county jail for transporting six and a half pounds of methamphetamines. We modify the judgment to correct a few clerical errors but otherwise affirm. FACTS In 2009, the Drug Enforcement Agency (DEA) began to investigate David Gonzalez Sanchez, whom they believed to be in the upper-echelons of a drug trafficking organization. The DEA obtained warrants to intercept and monitor 20 different telephone lines, including telephone numbers associated with Sanchez. Approximately 2,000 telephone calls were monitored. Of particular importance to this matter are 12 intercepted telephone calls, mainly between an unidentified man, UM127,1 and Sanchez. Because the participants spoke Spanish and often used code to disguise the true topic of the calls, the DEA agent in charge of the investigation testified to the contents of the telephone calls and translated transcripts of the calls were provided to the jury at trial. The DEA agent explained that UM127 operated a drug trafficking cell in Sacramento, California while Sanchez operated out of Los Angeles. Both men were from Michoacan, Mexico, a hub for the La Familia drug cartel. From November 16 to November 18, 2010, the DEA intercepted a series of calls between UM127 and Sanchez to set up a transfer of narcotics. On November 16, 2010, UM127 alerted Sanchez that they would be going down to Los Angeles from Sacramento sometime that day or the next day. In a November 17, 2010 call with Sanchez, UM127 indicated they were still in Sacramento. When Sanchez asked how many “tickets” or money UM127 intended to bring him, UM127 said he had at least “50” or $50,000, but intended to collect additional outstanding debts from his customers in Sacramento to give to Sanchez. On the morning of November 18, 2010, UM127 told Sanchez he wasn’t able to personally come down and instead sent a female courier, “a lady” who “already knows what to do.” He also confirmed he was sending $78,000 to Sanchez and verified the purity of the product he was receiving. They discussed the details of the exchange: “the
More from California Court of Appeal
- People v. Hill (1998)
- In Re Autumn H. (1994)
- Nwosu v. Uba (2004)
- In Re Casey D. (1999)
- Santisas v. Goodin (1998)
- Cahill v. San Diego Gas & Electric Co. (2011)
- People v. Rivera (2015)
- People v. Barnett (1998)
- People v. Serrano (2012)
- Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007)