United States v. Barron-Soto, No. 13-14731 (11th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this CaseDefendants Barron-Soto and Hernandez appealed convictions stemming from their involvement in a conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine. The court concluded that the evidence obtained from the execution of the search warrants was admissible under the independent source exception to the exclusionary rule. Therefore, notwithstanding the Supreme Court's decision in Riley v. California, the court affirmed the district court’s order denying Hernandez and Barron-Soto’s motions to suppress. The court also concluded that Hernandez has not shown that the district court abused its discretion admitting evidence of his prior charge or determining that the probative value of the evidence outweighed the risk of undue prejudice. Finally, the evidence was sufficient to convict Hernandez of knowingly joining a conspiracy to possess methamphetamine with the intent to distribute. Accordingly, the court affirmed the judgment.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.