PUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 20-4105 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff – Appellee, v. MAXIMO H. GONDRES-MEDRANO, Defendant – Appellant. Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Maryland, at Baltimore. George L. Russell, III, U.S. District Court Judge. (1:17-cr-00507-GLR-1) Argued: May 7, 2021 Decided: July 8, 2021 Before FLOYD, RICHARDSON, and QUATTLEBAUM, Circuit Judges. Affirmed by published opinion. Judge Richardson wrote the opinion, in which Judge Floyd and Judge Quattlebaum joined. ARGUED: Alfred Guillaume, III, LAW OFFICES OF ALFRED GUILLAUME III, Greenbelt, Maryland, for Appellant. Jeffrey Morgan Hann, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. ON BRIEF: Robert K. Hur, United States Attorney, OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY, Baltimore, Maryland, for Appellee. RICHARDSON, Circuit Judge: Confidential informants are often a fixture of investigations in popular media. And real-life informants provide vital help to law enforcement, especially in drug cases. This case is a prime example. In 2017, a known confidential informant with a track record of providing reliable information told law enforcement that Maximo Humberto Gondres- Medrano was trafficking drugs in Baltimore, Maryland. The informant’s insight led law enforcement to watch Gondres-Medrano put a shoebox in the informant’s car and drive off to allegedly sell heroin. When the car was stopped, officers found heroin in the shoebox. Gondres-Medrano was indicted, convicted, and sentenced to 121 months in prison. Gondres-Medrano appeals three issues. First, he argues that the police lacked probable cause to search the shoebox so the heroin should have been suppressed. Second, he argues that the court erred in admitting a video that showed him opening a heroin package because the unfair prejudice from the video was too high under Rule 403. Finally, he claims that the court erred in applying an obstruction-of-justice enhancement for perjury during sentencing. We disagree and affirm. I. Background A. The investigation and arrest In 2017, a long-standing confidential informant told FBI Task Force Officer Mark Williams that an individual later identified as the defendant, Gondres-Medrano, was involved in heroin and cocaine trafficking between New York and Baltimore. This informant had been used several times before, leading to several arrests. So Williams began to investigate. The investigation included Williams listening to a recorded 2 conversation between the informant and a person the informant identified as Gondres- Medrano. Gondres-Medrano talked about trafficking cocaine between his place in Maryland and New York. Based on this information, Williams obtained a warrant to track Gondres-Medrano’s cellphone. Williams also learned Gondres-Medrano’s full name and address in Baltimore. Williams then got in contact with Homeland Security Investigations Special Agent Edward Kelly who ran an immigration check and learned that Gondres- Medrano had overstayed his immigration visa, had a disqualifying drug conviction, and was subject to removal. Agent Kelly issued a Notice to Appear and obtained an arrest warrant for Gondres-Medrano. The informant then told Williams that Gondres-Medrano intended to transport heroin from his residence on September 8th and that the informant was to provide transportation. So …
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals