United States District Court, D. Massachusetts
For Armando Meras Chavez, also known as the Skinny Guy also known as Mando, Defendant: Paul J. Andrews, Jr., Paul J. Andrews, Esq., Braintree, MA.
For Arturo Rodriguez Ornelaz, also known as the Chubby Guy also known as Tore, Defendant: J. Thomas Kerner, LEAD ATTORNEY, Boston, MA.
For Miguel Aguilar, Defendant: John A. Amabile, LEAD ATTORNEY, Amabile & Burkly, P.C., Brockton, MA.
For Orlando Lopez, also known as Santos Gonzalez, Defendant: William Keefe, LEAD ATTORNEY, Law Office of William Keefe, Boston, MA.
For USA, Plaintiff: Nathaniel R. Mendell, LEAD ATTORNEY, United States Attorney's Office, Boston, MA; Katherine H. Ferguson, United States Attorney for the District of Masssachussetts, John Joseph Moakley U.S. Federal Courthouse, Boston, MA.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
Nathaniel M. Gorton, United States District Judge.
Defendant Miguel Aguilar (" Aguilar" ) has been indicted for Conspiracy to Possess with Intent to Distribute and to Distribute Cocaine and Heroin in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 (Count 1) and Possession with Intent to Distribute Cocaine and Heroin, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) (Count 2). With respect to Count 1, Aguilar allegedly conspired with six other individuals from August, 2010 through December, 2011 to possess and distribute cocaine, a Schedule II controlled substance, and heroin, a Schedule I controlled substance, in Boston, Chelsea and elsewhere in the District of Massachusetts. With respect to Count 2, on or about October 19, 2011, defendant allegedly possessed with intent to distribute at least five kilograms of a substance containing cocaine and at least one kilogram of a substance containing heroin.
Aguilar filed a pro se motion to suppress evidence in September, 2014. The Court held a status conference later that month, during which Attorney Amabile indicated that he neither drafted nor was consulted about the motion before his client filed it with the Court. He agreed to re-file the motion on Aguilar's behalf. Pending before the Court are: 1) the motion filed directly by the defendant, which will be denied as moot and 2) the supplemental motion to suppress as to defendant Aguilar filed by his counsel.
I. Supplemental motion to suppress as to defendant Aguilar
In October, 2014, Aguilar's attorney re-filed his client's original motion as a supplemental motion to suppress physical evidence. The defendant moves for the Court to order the suppression of any and all evidence seized from him and his tractor trailer on October 19, 2011 on the grounds that the stop and search were unlawful because the police did not have probable cause or consent. Defendant also requests an evidentiary hearing on the matter.
The searches to which the defendant objects were conducted as part of a wiretap investigation initiated in August, 2011 by governmental agents (" agents" ) as part of an investigation of a Mexican drug trafficking organization and its Massachusetts-based counterparts. The defendant allegedly operated a tractor trailer that was used to transport drugs and drug proceeds as part of the conspiracy.
On October 19, 2011, agents learned through wiretap that members of defendant's conspiracy were preparing to make another exchange of drugs and drug proceeds that day. The agents ...