United States of America v. DALMACIO RAMIREZ SANTOS, AKA Dalmacio Santos Ramirez, AKA Damacio Ramirez Santos

This disposition is not appropriate for publication and is not precedent*
except as provided by 9th Cir. R. 36-3.
The Honorable Lloyd D. George, Senior District Judge for the U.S.**
District Court for Nevada, sitting by designation.
NOT FOR PUBLICATION
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
v.
DALMACIO RAMIREZ SANTOS, AKA
Dalmacio Santos Ramirez, AKA Damacio
Ramirez Santos,
Defendant - Appellant.
No. 10-10559
D.C. No. 5:09-cr-00277-JW-1
MEMORANDUM*
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of California
James Ware, Chief District Judge, Presiding
Argued and Submitted December 8, 2011
San Francisco, California
Before: TROTT and BEA, Circuit Judges, and GEORGE, Senior District Judge.**
Dalmacia Ramirez Santos appeals his conviction for distribution of
methamphetamine, possession of cocaine with intent to distribute, and possession
FILED
DEC 21 2011
MOLLY C. DWYER, CLERK
U .S. C OU R T OF APPE ALS

-- 1 of 3 --

2
of a firearm in furtherance of drug trafficking. As the facts and procedural history
are familiar to the parties, we do not recite them here except as necessary to
explain our decision. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291, and we affirm.
The search of Santos’s truck was permissible under the “automobile
exception” to the warrant requirement. United States v. Ross, 456 U.S. 798, 808-
09 (1982). The record amply supports the district court’s conclusion that Officer
Murphy possessed probable cause to believe the vehicle contained contraband.
Officer Murphy knew that Santos had just departed from a location that was the
site of a drug trafficking investigation. Throughout the stop, Santos exhibited
extreme nervousness. When Officer Murphy patted Santos down he felt a large
bundle of cash in each of his pockets. Finally, as Officer Craig was handcuffing
Santos, the truck’s passenger turned and made a lunging motion in an apparent
attempt to reach something in the area behind the driver’s seat. Under the totality
of the circumstances, Officer Murphy had probable cause to believe Santos’s truck
contained illegal drugs, an illegally concealed weapon, or both. Because the
district court reasonably held that Officer Warner’s search was a continuation of
Officer Murphy’s interrupted initial search, the entire search procedure was based
on probable cause.

-- 2 of 3 --

3
The district court appropriately exercised its discretion in denying a motion
for a mistrial because of jury access, during deliberation, to DVDs containing
footage not shown during the trial. The district court did not err because the DVDs
had been admitted into evidence without objection. Any error would have been
harmless because the footage -- of the time before and after several controlled buys
which were shown during the trial -- was not prejudicial and “the evidence of
[Santos’s] guilt was otherwise overwhelming.” United States v. McKenna, 327
F.3d 830, 842 (9th Cir. 2003). We decline to review Santos’s ineffective
assistance of counsel claim because, without a fully developed record, it is not
properly before the court on direct appeal. United States v. Rahman, 642 F.3d
1257, 1259-60 (9th Cir. 2011).
AFFIRMED.

-- 3 of 3 --