United States v. Amaya, No. 14-2617 (7th Cir. 2016)
Annotate this CaseAmaya, a ranking officer in the Latin Kings street gang, was convicted of drug‐related crimes (distributing cocaine, possessing cocaine with the intent to distribute it, and carrying a gun in furtherance of his cocaine distribution) and organized‐gang‐related crimes (conspiring to conduct racketeering activity and aiding and abetting a violent crime in aid of racketeering). The Seventh Circuit affirmed, rejecting challenges to the sufficiency of the evidence for the gun count and the two racketeering convictions. The court upheld the admission of an out‐of‐court statement made by an undercover law‐enforcement agent. The statement, an exclamation about a gun, was not hearsay because it was not offered for its truth, and its admission was not unduly prejudicial. The admission of an out‐of‐court statement made by a confidential informant did not violate Amaya’s constitutional right to confront the witnesses against him; the statement was not the type of “testimonial” statement covered by the Sixth Amendment’s Confrontation Clause.
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.