Supreme Court to Review Conviction of California Woman Claiming Unwitting Role in Drug Smuggling

The Supreme Court of the United States
The Supreme Court of the United States. Credit | Getty images

United States – The Supreme Court of the United States on Tuesday will attend to the challenge of a California woman to overturn her conviction for drug smuggling across the U.S.-Mexican border in a legal dispute over her claim of being unconsciously a “blind” drug mule.

Legal Challenge

The justices will hear an appeal from Delilah Guadalupe Diaz’s case after the lower court didn’t agree to remove a witness’ testimony that was claiming that what she didn’t know was that methamphetamine valued at USD 368,550 was hidden in the door panels of the car she was driving, as reported by Reuters.

The case essentially examines the limits of the statements that the law enforcement agencies who are appearing as trial experts can give the jury about “some intent element” in a case of drug trafficking as being charged with the “guilty mind.”

Diaz’s acknowledgment of the role he played and the rightful punishment in the year 2021 for the imported drug made the jury find him guilty of this crime. Diaz was sentenced to a period of 7 years in prison duration.

Those who smuggle drugs across borders, and are usually called drug “mules,” do it for money and sometimes do it unintentionally, transporting an illicit drug that was planted on their person. Such people usually nicknamed them as “blind” mules.

The justices will consider whether allowing such expert testimony exceeds the boundaries of federal law, namely admissible evidence in judicial proceedings.

Limits of Expert Testimony

Diaz’s attorneys have contended that testimony at her trial breached an existing rule prohibiting expert witnesses from formulating their opinions about the “mental status” of defendants and whether or not they knew there was an offense they were committing.

Her lawyers asserted that “grossly unfair,” generalizations implying that a defendant must be guilty are unfair as they take away a jury’s duty of analyzing the defendant’s guilt.

U.S. District Judge Anthony Battaglia let the prosecution’s expert witness, a Homeland Security-specific agent, tell the jury that, “in most circumstances, the driver knows they are hired.” Further, the expert explained that most organizations do not rely on unknown couriers to transfer large quantities of drugs.

Background

In 2020, a border inspector ordered Diaz, a resident of Moreno Valley, California, to roll down a window of her Ford Focus and heard a “crunch-like” sound, which was later revealed by the inspector to be 56 packages, over 24 kilograms of pure methamphetamine. Dias claimed that he did not know about the drugs.

She carried two cell phones—one locked, and she could not pick it up—and asserted that the automobile belonged to a boyfriend who lives in Mexico, whose phone number and address she could not show. The car had an additional GPS device hidden in it, as reported by Reuters.

Implications and Timeline

In January of last year, the 9th District Court of Appeals in San Francisco rejected her appeal.

According to the Supreme Court’s schedule, the judgment is likely to be performed in June.