## Facts

- Julio De La Torre stayed at a hotel in Wichita, Kansas, where staff reported suspicious activity, including suspected false identification use and marijuana odor.
- Police saw De La Torre flee the hotel carrying a backpack, which he discarded during the chase.
- Officers recovered and searched the backpack, finding marijuana and methamphetamine in amounts consistent with distribution, plus scales and related items.
- At trial, De La Torre testified that another person handed him the backpack and that he believed it contained only marijuana; he claimed he learned methamphetamine was inside only after police opened it.
- A superseding indictment charged him with (1) possession with intent to distribute 50 grams or more of methamphetamine and (2) possession with intent to distribute less than 50 kilograms of a marijuana-containing substance, both under 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1).
- A jury convicted De La Torre on both counts; the district court sentenced him to 121 months’ imprisonment.
- At trial, the government impeached De La Torre with statements he made during a U.S. Pretrial Services interview.

## Issues

1. Whether the jury instructions improperly allowed conviction on the methamphetamine count without proof that De La Torre knew methamphetamine was in the backpack.
2. Whether statements made to U.S. Pretrial Services, barred from use “to establish guilt,” could be used by the government to impeach De La Torre’s trial testimony.
3. Whether the district court erred in denying safety-valve relief by refusing to consider trial testimony as satisfying the disclosure requirement of 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f) and U.S.S.G. § 5C1.2(a)(5).

## Decision

- The Tenth Circuit affirmed De La Torre’s convictions.
- The court upheld the knowledge instruction as consistent with § 841(a)(1), which requires knowledge of possession of a controlled substance, not knowledge of the specific identity of each drug.
- The court held that Pretrial Services statements could be used for impeachment, with a limiting instruction restricting the jury’s use to credibility rather than substantive proof of guilt.
- The Tenth Circuit vacated the sentence and remanded for reconsideration of safety-valve eligibility, directing the district court to consider whether De La Torre’s trial testimony (and other admissible evidence) satisfied the disclosure requirement by the time of sentencing.

## Legal Principles

- For possession with intent to distribute under 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), the government must prove the defendant knowingly possessed a controlled substance, but need not prove knowledge of the precise chemical identity of the substance(s) possessed.
- Statutory protections limiting use of U.S. Pretrial Services interview statements “to establish guilt” do not categorically bar their use to impeach a defendant who testifies inconsistently at trial, provided the jury is properly instructed on the limited purpose.
- Safety-valve relief under 18 U.S.C. § 3553(f) and U.S.S.G. § 5C1.2(a)(5) may be satisfied through truthful, complete disclosure made no later than the sentencing hearing; trial testimony can satisfy this requirement if it is truthful and complete and the government has a fair opportunity to contest it at sentencing.
- A sentencing court may not categorically refuse to consider trial testimony as a possible means of satisfying the safety-valve disclosure requirement; it must assess truthfulness and completeness on the record.

## Conclusion

The Tenth Circuit affirmed the drug convictions, permitted impeachment using Pretrial Services interview statements with a limiting instruction, and vacated the sentence because the district court wrongly refused to consider whether the defendant’s trial testimony could satisfy the safety-valve disclosure requirement, requiring remand for a proper eligibility determination.


United States v. De La Torre, 599 F.3d 1198 (10th Cir. 2010)