## Facts

- On May 30, 1997, a person later identified as Jose Luis Castillo attempted to enter the United States at the Calexico port of entry as the sole occupant driving a Jeep Cherokee; inspectors found 11 packages of marijuana totaling about 80.07 kg, and Castillo fled back into Mexico when questioned.
- On June 24, 1997, Castillo again attempted to enter at Calexico, driving a 1985 Lincoln; agents found about 22.82 kg of marijuana in a hidden compartment, and Castillo was arrested.
- Castillo was charged with importation and possession with intent to distribute for both incidents; the jury convicted him on the June 24 counts and acquitted him on the May 30 counts.
- Pretrial, the district court excluded evidence of a May 27, 1997 cocaine-possession arrest but admitted a 1995 marijuana-possession conviction.
- At trial, Castillo testified and portrayed himself as anti-drug, stating he worked with disadvantaged children, taught them to avoid drugs, had never used drugs, and would not smuggle drugs “for a million dollars”; much of this was volunteered and broad.
- After that testimony, the district court admitted evidence of the prior cocaine arrest to contradict Castillo’s categorical claims.
- At sentencing, despite the acquittal on the May 30 counts, the district court found beyond a reasonable doubt that Castillo was responsible for the May 30 marijuana and included it as relevant conduct, imposing a 120-month sentence.

## Issues

1. Whether the district court abused its discretion by admitting evidence of Castillo’s prior cocaine arrest to impeach his broad trial testimony disclaiming any association with drugs.
2. Whether the district court erred by considering conduct underlying acquitted counts (the May 30 marijuana) as relevant conduct in calculating the Sentencing Guidelines offense level.

## Decision

- The Ninth Circuit affirmed the conviction and sentence.
- The court held the cocaine-arrest evidence was properly admitted as impeachment by contradiction after Castillo opened the door with sweeping claims, and the probative value was not substantially outweighed by unfair prejudice.
- The court held the district court could consider acquitted conduct as relevant conduct for Guidelines calculations if proved by at least a preponderance of the evidence; the beyond-a-reasonable-doubt finding satisfied that standard.

## Legal Principles

- A defendant who offers broad, categorical testimony denying any drug involvement may be impeached by contradiction with specific evidence that directly refutes those assertions, even if the evidence involves prior misconduct, when used to challenge credibility rather than to show propensity.
- A trial court may revisit an in limine exclusion when the defendant’s actual testimony at trial changes the evidentiary context and opens the door to otherwise excluded evidence.
- In federal sentencing, a court may include conduct underlying acquitted counts as relevant conduct under the Sentencing Guidelines if the conduct is established by at least a preponderance of the evidence; an acquittal does not bar consideration of the underlying conduct for sentencing purposes.

## Conclusion

The Ninth Circuit upheld admission of a prior cocaine arrest to contradict Castillo’s expansive anti-drug testimony and affirmed the use of acquitted conduct as relevant conduct at sentencing because the district court found the May 30 drug quantity proved (at a standard exceeding what sentencing requires).


United States v. Castillo, 181 F.3d 1129 (9th Cir. 1999)