Evidence-Expert Testimony

Listen to this article

7^th Circuit Court of Appeals

Case Name: United States of America v. Marcos Bahena

Case No.: 22-1691

Officials: Flaum, St. Eve, and Pryor, Circuit Judges.

Focus: Evidence-Expert Testimony

In March 2019, agents intercepted calls via a wiretap on Jose Bahena’s phone. Despite Jose’s attempts to obscure his plan by using coded language, the wiretap revealed that he was arranging an illicit transaction. He spoke with a supplier who would be bringing new product into town on a semitruck, as well as with a distributor who would help sell the product upon its arrival. In addition, Jose had frequent calls with his brother, Marcos, the defendant in this case. Marcos’s main role was to arrange a clandestine meeting spot where they could pick up the product from the supplier’s courier. Marcos appeals from a jury conviction for conspiring to possess cocaine with intent to distribute. He argues that multiple errors occurred during the trial—most notably, that the government’s expert witness testified beyond the scope of his expertise. He also contends that the government did not present enough evidence to support the conviction. The jury had a sufficient basis to find there was an agreement to distribute cocaine that Bahena “knowingly and intentionally joined.”

Affirmed.

Decided 06/22/23

Full Text