United States v. Soto-Barraza, No. 15-10586 (9th Cir. 2020)
Annotate this Case
The Ninth Circuit affirmed defendants' convictions for first degree murder of a Border Patrol agent, conspiracy to interfere with and attempted interference with commerce by robbery in violation of the Hobbs Act, and assault on a U.S. Border Patrol Agent. The panel held that defendants were properly extradited in accordance with the terms of the United States's treaty with Mexico; the jury instructions for the Hobbs Act offenses were not plainly erroneous; defendants' argument that the instructions constituted a constructive amendment of the indictment was without merit; and the evidence was sufficient to establish that defendants took a substantial step toward commission of the robbery offense.
In a concurrently-filed memorandum opinion, the panel vacated defendants' convictions for carrying and discharging a firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence.
Court Description: Criminal Law. The panel affirmed two defendants’ convictions for first- degree murder of a Border Patrol agent, conspiracy to interfere with and attempted interference with commerce by robbery in violation of the Hobbs Act, and assault on a U.S. Border Patrol Agent; and vacated the defendants’ convictions for carrying and discharging a firearm in furtherance of a crime of violence. * The Honorable Michael J. McShane, United States District Judge for the District of Oregon, sitting by designation. UNITED STATES V. SOTO-BARRAZA 3 The panel held that the defendants were properly extradited in accordance with the United States’s treaty with Mexico. The panel held that the district court’s jury instructions for the Hobbs Act offenses were not plainly erroneous, and rejected the defendants’ argument that the instructions constituted a constructive amendment of the indictment that allowed them to be convicted of extortion. The panel held that the district court properly denied the defendants’ motion for judgment of acquittal as to attempted robbery because the evidence was sufficient to establish that the defendants took a substantial step toward commission of the robbery. In a concurrently filed memorandum disposition, the panel accepted the government’s concession that conspiracy to commit Hobbs Act robbery is not a crime of violence and thus vacated the defendants’ convictions under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c).
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.