1 1 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF VIRGINIA Harrisonburg Division 2 3 4 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 5 6 vs. 9 10 11 12 Roanoke, Virginia GEORGE HENRY COVARRUBAIZ, 7 8 Defendant. APPEARANCES: For the United States: 14 For the Defendant: 16 17 18 19 20 21 September 29, 2014 TRANSCRIPT OF TESTIMONY OF BLANCA LOPEZ and GREGG MERVIS BEFORE THE HONORABLE MICHAEL F. URBANSKI, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 13 15 Criminal No. 5:14cr00019 Court Reporter: U.S. Attorney's Office GRAYSON HOFFMAN 116 N. Main St. Room 130 Harrisonburg, VA 22802 Federal Public Defender's Offc. RANDY V. CARGILL 210 First St. SW Ste. 420 Roanoke, VA 24011 Sonia R. Ferris, RPR U.S. Court Reporter 116 N. Main St. Room 314 Harrisonburg, VA 22802 540.434.3181 Ext. 7 22 23 24 25 Proceedings recorded by mechanical stenography; transcript produced by computer. Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 1 of 85 Pageid#: 1056 Lopez - - Direct 1 2 3 MR. HOFFMAN: BLANCA LOPEZ, CALLED AS A WITNESS BY THE GOVERNMENT, SWORN 5 THE COURT: 6 THE WITNESS: 7 9 10 Your Honor, we'll start with our first witness, Blanca Lopez. 4 8 2 Good afternoon. Good afternoon. DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. HOFFMAN: Q. Would you please just introduce yourself? State your full name for the judge, please. 11 A. Blanca Lopez. 12 Q. And in what city and state do you presently 13 reside? 14 A. I reside in Diamond Bar, California. 15 Q. Is that Southern California? 16 A. Yes. 17 Q. Who do you work for? 18 A. I work for RET Monitoring, Incorporated; contract 19 company for the Drug Enforcement Administration. 20 Q. What's your native language? 21 A. Spanish. 22 Q. Where is RET Monitoring, Incorporated, located? 23 A. Tuscon, Arizona. 24 Q. And what is your current job at RET Monitoring? 25 A. I'm a linguist. Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 2 of 85 Pageid#: 1057 Lopez - - Direct 1 2 Q. 3 Do you hold any type of supervisory capacity or are you just a linguist? 3 A. I'm a supervisor linguist. 4 Q. What do you do at RET as a supervisory linguist? 5 A. I work on wire tap investigations, supervising 6 other linguists. 7 Q. Do you supervise monitors? 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. Do you ever do any monitoring yourself? 10 A. Yes, I do. 11 Q. Would you just take two seconds and explain to 12 the Court, when you say you monitor yourself, what does 13 that mean? 14 15 A. We monitor wire tap investigations, live conversations, Title III investigations. 16 Q. Do you also participate in transcribing? 17 A. Yes, I do. 18 I mostly do the quality control on transcripts. 19 Q. So, you review transcripts also. 20 A. Correct. 21 Q. Do you perform -- let me back up. 22 23 24 25 Are the calls always in English? A. No. The majority are in Spanish. I would say about 95 percent in Spanish. Q. Do you then interpret calls into English? Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 3 of 85 Pageid#: 1058 Lopez - - Direct 4 1 A. Correct. 2 Q. Your monitors that you supervise do the same? 3 A. Yes. 4 Q. The quality control you mentioned a moment ago 5 that you exercise, is that over the transcriptions and 6 over the interpretations? 7 A. Yes. 8 Q. A moment ago, I believe you testified that RET is 9 a monitoring company that's contracted with DEA? 10 A. Correct. 11 Q. Does RET do work for other agencies? 12 A. Yes. They also do work for any law enforcement 13 14 15 agencies; FBI, ATF, ICE. Q. Tell us how your job works mechanically, on a daily basis. 16 A. We are in a wire room area. 17 come in. 18 usually, the conversations are in Spanish. We then write 19 the synopsis in English. Basically, that's what we do. We monitor them. Live conversations We write a synopsis because 20 Q. The synopsis, is that also called a line sheet? 21 A. Yes. 22 Q. At some point in time, is that synopsis 23 transcribed completely? 24 A. Yes, at some point. 25 Q. After it's transcribed, it could then be Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 4 of 85 Pageid#: 1059 Lopez - - Direct 1 2 3 4 interpreted, translated? A. It's transcribed in English and then translated. Q. 5 6 Yes. Thank you. What percentage of the calls would you say that you monitor are in Spanish? 7 A. About 95 percent. 8 Q. How long have you been a supervisory linguist or 9 supervisory monitor at RET? 10 A. Approximately 16 years. 11 Q. 16 years, as a supervisor. 12 A. Yes. 13 Q. How many different wire tap investigations do you 14 believe you've worked in, participated in? 15 A. Hundreds. 16 Q. Hundreds? 17 A. Hundreds. 18 Q. And in those hundreds, does that 95 percent 19 Spanish rule apply? It's always been 95 percent, give or 20 take? 21 A. Yes. 22 Q. And since you've been with RET, how many calls 23 individually do you believe that you've monitored and 24 transcribed? 25 A. Hundreds. Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 5 of 85 Pageid#: 1060 5 Lopez - - Direct 1 2 Q. 6 How many calls do you think you've interpreted from Spanish to English? 3 A. Hundreds. 4 Q. What were you doing before 1999 when you joined 5 6 7 8 9 RET? A. I was -- I worked for a law firm as a legal secretary. Q. Did you ever work for a company called Professional Translators? 10 A. Yes. 11 Q. How long did you work there? 12 A. For about a year. 13 Q. What were you doing for Professional Translators? 14 A. I was a monitor linguist. 15 Q. So, same kind of thing? 16 A. Yes. 17 Q. Did you go to college? 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. Where did you go? 20 A. Cal State University. 21 Q. Did you obtain a degree? 22 A. It was a certificate program. 23 I was certified as a legal interpreter and translator. 24 Q. In what year did you obtain that certification? 25 A. 1998. Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 6 of 85 Pageid#: 1061 Lopez - - Direct 1 2 Q. 7 Since then, have you undergone continuing certification requirements of any kind? 3 A. Yes. 4 Q. Tell us about those. 5 A. We are recertified every five years by the 6 Attorney General's office. 7 Q. Attorney General's office, of California? 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. What does that recertification process every five 10 11 12 13 14 years entail? A. We take a class and we are certified to conduct Title III wire tap investigations, monitor them. Q. In your monitoring career, have you ever trained other monitors yourself? 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. I want to break it down, the monitoring process 17 just a little more than we did a moment ago. 18 let's tailor it how your current job, how you do it in 19 your current job. 20 21 22 So, there's a monitor waiting. I want -- What happens when a call comes in? A. We listen to the call. It's real time. Listen 23 to the call, write a synopsis of the call. The call 24 will give us all detailed information, whether the call 25 is incoming, outgoing, dial digits, and we get the audio Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 7 of 85 Pageid#: 1062 Lopez - - Direct 8 1 of the call, date, time. 2 Then we translate the call from Spanish to English on 3 the line sheet. 4 Q. We get the audio of the call. Before you get there, you, sitting there as the 5 monitor, do you have to make a decision about the call 6 at any time? 7 A. Yes. Based on the content of the call, we decide 8 or try to decipher whether it's drug related, it's 9 pertinent, it's coded, does it have any coded language. 10 11 Q. You're deciding if it's pertinent or non-pertinent? 12 A. Correct. 13 Q. If it's non-pertinent, do you continue listening? 14 A. We minimize the call. 15 Q. Minimize the call; what does that mean? 16 A. We stop recording. 17 Q. You stop recording. 18 A. Then we spot check it and start recording again. 19 Q. What does spot checking mean? 20 A. We listen to it for another 30 seconds and then 21 determine whether it's still non-pertinent or whether it 22 goes back to being a pertinent call. 23 to record. 24 25 Q. Then we continue When you intercept a call that has pertinent information, what do you do with that information? Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 8 of 85 Pageid#: 1063 Lopez - - Direct 1 2 A. We give it to the case agent, pass that information along to the case agent. 3 Q. Right then or at a later time? 4 A. Right then. 5 Q. Then how does your quality control process work 6 7 now? A. That's after a call has been synopsized and I or 8 another lead monitor can go into the call and listen to 9 the call for quality control, review it for the content, 10 11 12 the voices, information. Q. And you are a supervisor who conducts the quality control review? 13 A. For the transcripts, yes. 14 Q. And in that, I want to make sure I'm 15 understanding you right. You go and you listen to the 16 call again and you confirm that the transcript that was 17 created and the interpretation are correct. 18 A. Correct. 19 Q. When did you become involved in this 20 21 22 23 investigation? A. I don't remember the exact time that we started that investigation. Q. I believe it was November of 2013. Which names do you remember hearing in some of 24 the calls that you were involved with in this 25 investigation? Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 9 of 85 Pageid#: 1064 9 Lopez - - Direct 10 1 A. From November? 2 Q. November and forward. 3 A. Okay. 4 Q. This whole investigation. 5 A. There was Everardo; there was Guillermo; 6 Benjamin; Jorge; Junior; Tarula; Surdo; Mono; Daniel; 7 Surdo; Juan. 8 now. That's what I remember from memory right 9 Q. Did you ever hear the defendant's name? 10 A. George? 11 Q. You did not. 12 A. I'm sorry, yes; George. 13 Q. How long approximately was this particular wire 14 Did I mention him; yes. tap investigation? 15 A. I believe it was around four months. 16 Q. And were you -- at that time, you were a 17 supervising monitor? 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. And in terms of the process and the quality 20 control and everything you've already testified about, 21 did you follow those procedures with this investigation? 22 A. Yes. 23 Q. And let's break it down a bit. A moment ago, you 24 testified that when you receive information as a monitor 25 or as a supervisory monitor that you share that Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 10 of 85 Pageid#: 1065 Lopez - - Direct 1 11 information quickly with the agents. 2 A. Correct. 3 Q. Were you doing that back toward the beginning of 4 this investigation? 5 A. Yes. 6 Q. Did you do that throughout this investigation? 7 A. Yes. 8 Q. In the beginning of the investigation, who were 9 you sharing the information with? 10 A. Andrew Vestie. 11 Q. Who was Andrew Vestie? 12 A. He's the case agent on that particular 13 investigation. 14 Q. Where does Andrew Vestie work? 15 A. Los Angeles, California. 16 Q. Do you know who he works for? 17 A. He works for Fontana Police Department. 18 assigned as a task force officer for the Drug 19 Enforcement Administration. 20 Q. He's So, that's in November. Let's fast forward to the 21 end of January. 22 end of January? Were you working as a monitor at the 23 A. Yes. 24 Q. Did there come a point in time at the end of 25 January, last couple of days of January, where you were Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 11 of 85 Pageid#: 1066 Lopez - - Direct 1 passing information to a different agent? 2 A. Yes. 3 Q. At the end of January, to whom were you passing 4 wire tap information? 5 A. Gregg Mervis. 6 Q. Who is Gregg Mervis? 7 A. He's a DEA agent. 8 Q. Where? 9 A. Virginia, D.C. 10 Q. Why did you pass information to Gregg Mervis, in 11 12 12 Virginia? Why Virginia? A. Per the instruction of Andrew Vestie, knowing 13 that there was a vehicle that was going to be travelling 14 to Virginia. 15 Q. How did you share the investigation with Gregg 16 Mervis? 17 A. By telephone. 18 Q. For the next few days, did you continue to pass 19 information obtained on the wire tap on which you were 20 working to Gregg Mervis? 21 A. Yes. 22 Q. Did you continue to pass information right up 23 through February 3? 24 A. Yes. 25 Q. One moment, Your Honor. Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 12 of 85 Pageid#: 1067 Lopez - - Direct 1 2 13 (Government Exhibits #1B and #1-#20 were marked for identification). 3 In preparation for today's hearing, did you have 4 an opportunity to listen to some of the calls that were 5 monitored? 6 A. Yes. 7 Q. And did you review transcripts in connection with 8 those? 9 A. Yes. 10 Q. Your Honor, may I approach the witness? 11 12 I'm showing you what has been marked Government Exhibit 1B. Do you recognize this disc? 13 A. Yes. 14 Q. How do you recognize it? 15 A. Those are my initials. 16 Q. Did you listen to items on this disc? 17 A. Yes. 18 Q. I'm also showing you what has been marked for I initialed it. 19 identification as Government 1 through 20. 20 saying what they are, would you just take a moment and 21 flip through those and just tell me if you recognize 22 what they are, if you've seen those documents before? 23 A. (Witness reviewing said documents). Without They're 24 transcripts of some of the recorded conversations in 25 this investigation that were prepared by the monitors Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 13 of 85 Pageid#: 1068 Lopez - - Direct 1 14 and reviewed by me. 2 Q. How do you recognize this? 3 A. I initialed them. 4 Q. You initialed every single one? 5 A. I initialed every single one of them and the face 6 on the cover sheet, there's my name, which indicates 7 that I did the reviewing, the quality control for these 8 transcripts. 9 Q. You reviewed all of these; correct? 10 A. Correct. 11 Q. And more recently, you reviewed them again while 12 listening to the audio on Government Exhibit 1B? 13 A. Correct. 14 Q. When you reviewed them, were the transcriptions 15 accurate? 16 A. Yes. 17 Q. Were the translations from Spanish to English 18 19 accurate? A. Yes. 20 MR. HOFFMAN: Your Honor, we'd move to admit 21 1B and 1 through 20 into evidence for purposes of this 22 hearing. 23 THE COURT: 1B. 24 MR. HOFFMAN: 1B and 1 through 20. 25 MR. CARGILL: Yes, I do object, Your Honor. Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 14 of 85 Pageid#: 1069 Lopez - - Direct 15 1 Unless and until the United States can show these 2 transcripts were used by the officers who supposedly 3 concluded that there was probable cause to stop, I don't 4 think they're relevant. 5 MR. HOFFMAN: Your Honor, she's already 6 testified that she delivered the information from these 7 transcripts and from this to Gregg Mervis and other 8 agents. 9 believe she's already testified, provided the Court with Gregg Mervis will testify in a moment, but I 10 sufficient facts that she relayed this information to a 11 member of the investigation team. 12 it comes. 13 MR. CARGILL: That's as relevant as Your Honor, there's been no 14 evidence that these transcripts were even in existence, 15 had been typed up and prepared as of the date of this 16 stop on February 3. 17 that question. 18 Perhaps my colleague could ask her THE COURT: I think what she said was when 19 they got a phone call, in real time, that was relevant, 20 she would share that with the case agent. 21 22 I would assume, Ms. Lopez, that the transcripts were prepared later on. 23 24 25 THE WITNESS: That's correct. BY MR. HOFFMAN: Q. How much later usually? Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 15 of 85 Pageid#: 1070 Lopez - - Direct 1 2 A. Sometimes one week; sometimes six months. It depends on the investigation. 3 4 THE COURT: THE WITNESS: 6 say exactly when. 7 BY MR. HOFFMAN: 9 10 Do you know when these transcripts were prepared? 5 8 Q. The dates are -- no, I can't The information that was in these though, correct me if I'm wrong, you passed that information to Gregg Mervis and to Andrew Vestie? 11 A. That information was passed on, real time. 12 Q. Immediately, when you received it. 13 A. Yes. 14 15 THE COURT: When you say real time, how was it passed on? 16 THE WITNESS: We are intercepting the 17 conversation. 18 phone and we are pretty much translating what we're 19 listening to, to the case agent. 20 We listen to the call and we pick up the THE COURT: You're actually picking up the 21 call, got a call, you need to hear this, this is what 22 they're saying. 23 THE WITNESS: 24 THE COURT: 25 16 This is what they're saying. This is what they're saying. All right. Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 16 of 85 Pageid#: 1071 Lopez - - Direct 1 17 I am going to sustain the objection at this 2 time. I think there hasn't been a showing the agent has 3 actually reviewed these transcripts. I think the witness 4 can testify as to what, prior to the search, she told 5 the agents or the agents can testify as to what they 6 learned. 7 been no showing they were in existence and the agents 8 had knowledge of them prior to the stop in this case. 9 But as to the transcripts themselves, there's MR. HOFFMAN: Your Honor, maybe I should 10 clarify. 11 Court to follow along with, what is said on the calls, 12 which are in Spanish. 13 the agents reviewed these actual transcripts. These are 14 simply an aid which can be admitted into evidence simply 15 for the purpose of following along with ease of the 16 call. 17 18 These are being introduced as an aid for the We are not going to argue that THE COURT: here? 19 MR. HOFFMAN: 20 THE COURT: 21 MR. HOFFMAN: 22 THE COURT: 23 You intend to play the calls Oh, yes, yes, Your Honor. They're in Spanish? Yes, Your Honor. What good is that going to do me? 24 MR. HOFFMAN: 25 THE COURT: They've been interpreted. They've been interpreted. Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 17 of 85 Pageid#: 1072 Lopez - - Direct 1 MR. HOFFMAN: 18 Into English, as she just 2 testified, and the interpretation will be played on the 3 -- 4 THE COURT: 5 MR. HOFFMAN: 6 On the screen? Yes, Your Honor. That's the only purpose. 7 I think you'll hear, obviously, Ms. Lopez 8 speaks fluent Spanish. Gregg Mervis will testify he's a 9 fluency level four, completely fluent Spanish speaker. 10 The people that were involved were Spanish speakers. 11 We're not going to testify that they relied on these 12 actual transcripts in developing their probable cause. 13 This is for the Court -- 14 15 THE COURT: Mr. Cargill? 16 17 You understand that, MR. CARGILL: Yes, and I still object, Your Honor. 18 THE COURT: 19 MR. CARGILL: I'm going to -How do we know this is the 20 person who prepared the transcript? 21 testified she reviewed it, but she never testified she 22 is the person who was speaking to Agent Mervis, as far 23 as I could tell. 24 25 MR. HOFFMAN: She's the one who She did just testify a moment ago that she herself spoke to Agent Mervis for a period Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 18 of 85 Pageid#: 1073 Lopez - - Direct 19 1 of approximately six days. She doesn't need to testify, 2 under the law, that she is the one who actually prepared 3 the transcripts. 4 testified she's a supervisory monitor. She executed the 5 quality control process. 6 call, confirmed the transcription was accurate and the 7 translation was accurate. She only needs to testify -- she She listened to every single 8 The way we've done it in trials before -- 9 THE COURT: How do you know these particular 10 calls set forth on this disc and set forth in these 11 transcripts were actually given to the case agent? 12 13 THE WITNESS: I'm sorry. Can you repeat that? 14 THE COURT: 15 How do you know this information was related 16 Yes. to the case agent? 17 THE WITNESS: I myself related some of the 18 calls. 19 synopsis of the call. 20 someone working in the investigation when the calls were 21 coming in. 22 agent. 23 24 25 I can't say exactly which call until I see the But if it wasn't myself, it was That information gets relayed to the case THE COURT: How do you know each of these calls were relayed to the case agent? THE WITNESS: That's our job. That's what Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 19 of 85 Pageid#: 1074 Lopez - - Direct 1 we do. Every time a call comes in which has anything to 2 do with any coded language, it's always passed along to 3 the case agent. 4 20 That's part of our job. THE COURT: So you can testify and you've 5 reviewed these transcripts and you've reviewed this disc 6 that every one of those calls was passed on by you or 7 somebody working for you, to the case agent. 8 THE WITNESS: 9 THE COURT: 10 Yes. In this case, Mr. Mervis or Mr. Laconti. 11 THE WITNESS: 12 THE COURT: 13 I'll allow them. 14 Or Mr. Vestie. Mr. Vestie. I understand your objection. 15 Please proceed. 16 (Government Exhibits #1B and #1-#20 were 17 admitted into evidence). 18 BY MR. HOFFMAN: 19 Q. 20 Let me just clarify something. Which agent between, let's say, January 29 and 21 February 3rd, which agent, at the end, were you 22 communicating the information to? 23 24 25 A. It would first go to Mervis and then it would go to Vestie. Q. But you were communicating it yourself to Gregg Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 20 of 85 Pageid#: 1075 Lopez - - Cross 1 Mervis. 2 A. Yes. 21 If I was present in the wire room, yes, I 3 always communicated to Mervis first. 4 MR. HOFFMAN: Your Honor, I think at this 5 point, it makes the most sense to go ahead and play the 6 calls for the Court. 7 go from one to the next, with the Court's indulgence. They're all pretty brief. 8 THE COURT: 9 (Audio played). 10 11 Yes, please. MR. HOFFMAN: That's all our questions for this witness, Your Honor. 12 THE COURT: 13 MR. CARGILL: 14 15 We'll Mr. Cargill, any cross? Yes. Thank you, Your Honor. CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. CARGILL: 16 Q. Good afternoon, ma'am. 17 A. Good afternoon. 18 Q. So, I'm clear, we just heard a total of 19 calls; 19 is that right? 20 A. I'm sorry. I didn't count them. 21 Q. If there were 19 transcripts and numbered 22 exhibits -- or pardon me, 20 numbered exhibits with 23 transcripts attached to each, would that be consistent 24 with what we just heard? 25 A. Yes. Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 21 of 85 Pageid#: 1076 Lopez - - Cross 1 2 Q. And for those 20 conversations, you were not the person who transcribed any of those; correct? 3 A. Correct. 4 Q. In each instance, it was either Ms. Armenta, Ms. 5 Elias; correct? 6 A. Correct. 7 Q. Or Ms. or Mr. Carranza; correct? 8 A. Mr.; yes. 9 Q. Carranza? 10 A. Carranza, yes. 11 Q. In each instance, you reviewed the transcripts 12 22 after they were prepared; correct? 13 A. Correct. 14 Q. And all these transcripts were prepared after 15 this February 3 stop of Mr. Covarrubaiz in Virginia; 16 correct? 17 A. Correct. 18 Q. Now, you mentioned also that there were synopsis 19 or synopses prepared of each one of these conversations; 20 correct? 21 A. Correct. 22 Q. When are these to be prepared? 23 A. Those are prepared right after the intercepted 24 25 conversation. Q. Meaning? Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 22 of 85 Pageid#: 1077 Lopez - - Cross 1 A. 23 Meaning once the audio comes in, the audio is 2 recorded and can be re-listened to. 3 of the recorded conversation is prepared, in English. 4 5 6 Q. Then the synopsis And that's prepared by the person who listens to the conversation? A. Not necessarily. If that person who listened to 7 the conversation has ten other conversations that that 8 person monitored, somebody else can come in and 9 synopsize the call. 10 11 12 13 Q. When were the synopses prepared for each one of these calls? A. They should have -- well, both are prepared right after the telephone conversation is recorded. 14 Q. When? 15 A. On the day of the recorded conversation. 16 Q. Have you looked at the synopses for each one of 17 these conversations? 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. At the bottom left-hand corner of each one of 20 these synopses, is there not a date and a time stamp? 21 A. Yes. 22 Q. Would that indicate when the synopsis was 23 24 25 prepared? A. No, that indicates when the conversation was recorded. Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 23 of 85 Pageid#: 1078 Lopez - - Cross 1 2 24 (Defendant Exhibit #1 was marked for identification). 3 Q. Ms. Lopez, can you see that on your monitor? 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. And is that a synopsis of a telephone 6 conversation on 1/29 of 2014, at 3:19 in the afternoon? 7 A. Yes. 8 Q. And in the bottom left-hand corner, do you see 9 the date? 10 A. Yes. 11 Q. What's the date and the time? 12 A. February 5, 2014, at 2:48 p.m. 13 Q. That would be when the synopsis was prepared? 14 A. No. 15 Q. Why not? 16 A. I don't know. Our synopsis never had this date 17 down here. I don't know what this date means. I don't 18 know if that's when it was printed. 19 20 Q. I'm not sure. Is there anything on this document then that tells us when this was prepared? 21 A. No. 22 Q. Internally, do you indicate on the document when 23 it was prepared? 24 A. We do not. 25 Q. Why not? Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 24 of 85 Pageid#: 1079 Lopez - - Cross 1 A. 25 It's never been the practice of us to put the 2 date or the time the synopsis was prepared because like 3 I said, they're usually prepared right after the 4 conversation is recorded and monitored. 5 6 Q. Nor do you put the date of the transcription on the transcript? 7 A. On the transcript, no. 8 Q. Why not? 9 A. It's never been the practice. 10 THE COURT: 11 mean on this document? 12 THE WITNESS: What does that date and time I don't know. 13 was the date it was printed. 14 believe it's different fonts. 15 16 THE COURT: THE WITNESS: 18 THE COURT: 20 I'm not sure because I Are you the supervisor who is responsible for these synopses? 17 19 I'm thinking it Yes. And you can't tell me what date means. THE WITNESS: When we print out our 21 synopsis, we don't have the date and time stamped here 22 nor does it say Covarrubaiz wire taps. 23 24 25 THE COURT: That little thing in the middle of the page where it says Covarrubaiz wire taps. THE WITNESS: Correct. When we print out Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 25 of 85 Pageid#: 1080 Lopez - - Cross 1 our synopsis, it doesn't have this date or this 2 information. 3 4 THE COURT: THE WITNESS: 6 THE COURT: 10 Correct. And it's not your practice to put a date or time the transcript is prepared. 8 9 But it's not your practice to put a date or time when the synopsis is prepared. 5 7 THE WITNESS: Correct. BY MR. CARGILL: Q. And for these 20 telephone calls which we just 11 heard and for which the transcripts were prepared, how 12 many of those calls involved Mr. Covarrubaiz? 13 14 26 A. I believe it was two or three telephone conversations. 15 Q. 2 out of about 20; correct? 16 A. Yes, or maybe three of these. 17 Q. Who decided that these 20 calls were the ones 18 that would support the idea that there was cause to stop 19 his car, his truck? Who made that decision? 20 21 22 A. I don't know, sir. We transcribe all the calls and that would be up to, I believe, the case agent. Q. So can you say how many calls there were total 23 between Mr. Amador, who was the owner of this trucking 24 company, and Mr. Covarrubaiz during this time period? 25 A. There were more calls than just these. Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 26 of 85 Pageid#: 1081 Lopez - - Cross 27 1 Q. There were more. 2 A. Yes. 3 Q. But they weren't transcribed? 4 A. Yes, we transcribe all the pertinent calls. 5 Q. Who decides whether it's pertinent or not? 6 A. The case agent and us, depending on what we 7 8 9 10 11 12 listen to. Q. Is the case agent listening real time to each one of the calls? A. No, the case agent doesn't listen to, but we give him the information on the call. Q. So you're making the call as to whether it's 13 relevant to a drug investigation. 14 instance, you are. 15 A. In the first If we believe there is drug related information, 16 coded information, then we pass along that information 17 to the case agent. 18 19 20 Q. But if you don't think it has anything to do with drugs, you don't pass it along for the case agent? A. We still do for any relevant information, whether 21 they're talking about vehicles, addresses, names, yes. 22 We pass along a lot of information. 23 24 25 Q. What if it's entirely inconsistent with the idea drugs are involved? A. If we don't believe there is anything in that Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 27 of 85 Pageid#: 1082 Lopez - - Cross 1 2 3 call, then we do not. Q. What if it undercuts the idea that there's probable cause? Do you pass that on? 4 A. Sometimes we do. 5 Q. Sometimes? 6 A. Yes. 7 Q. Sometimes you don't. 8 A. Most of the time, like I said, it depends on the 9 content. 10 Q. Now it's most of the time? 11 A. It depends on the content of the call, of the 12 13 14 15 conversation. Q. Now, with these calls, how is it that the agent gets this information, real time? A. We call him when the call is being recorded. 16 When we're listening to the audio of the conversation, 17 we call the case agent. 18 parties are talking about. 19 20 Q. We let them know what the And that would be the person who's listening to the conversation? 21 A. Correct. 22 Q. And who was listening to each one of these 23 conversations? 24 A. The monitors, us, the linguists. 25 Q. Who? Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 28 of 85 Pageid#: 1083 28 Lopez - - Cross 1 2 A. The linguists who are assigned to this investigation. 3 Q. These are human beings; correct? 4 A. Correct; the people who are listening to the 5 conversation. 6 Q. They have names? 7 A. Yes. 8 9 There's 12 people in any given investigation. Q. I can name all of them. Well, take Government Exhibit #1, the first call. 10 This happens to be one of the two between Mr. 11 Covarrubaiz and Mr. Amador. 12 conversation? 13 A. Who listened to that The transcriber is not necessarily the person who 14 monitored the call. 15 the pen register information and/or the synopsis to see 16 who actually monitored that specific conversation. 17 Q. I would have to go back and look at So you don't know as you sit here who monitored 18 that conversation or any of these conversations; 19 correct? 20 A. Not by memory, no. 21 Q. And you don't know, therefore, what these 22 29 monitors said to the agent, do you? 23 A. Not exactly in those words, no. 24 Q. Not exactly in those words? 25 A. Not their exact words, no, I wouldn't know. Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 29 of 85 Pageid#: 1084 Lopez - - Cross 1 30 Unless it was me, yes, I would know. 2 Q. Were you the monitor for any of these 20 calls? 3 A. I believe I was. 4 Q. Which one? 5 A. Like I said, I don't know from memory. I would 6 have to look at the pen register and see who exactly 7 monitored those calls. 8 Q. Well, you flew out here from California; right? 9 A. Correct. 10 Q. That's a long flight; correct? 11 A. Correct. 12 Q. You knew you were going to be coming to testify 13 today; correct? 14 A. Correct. 15 Q. Did you look all this information up? 16 A. I listened to the recorded conversations and I 17 18 went over the transcripts, yes. Q. But did you find out who monitored each one of 19 these calls or find out which call you specifically 20 monitored? 21 A. I did not. 22 Q. So as you sit here, you cannot say what any of 23 the monitors of these conversations said to the agent 24 about what occurred during these conversations, can you? 25 A. Not by memory. I can't remember exactly what was Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 30 of 85 Pageid#: 1085 Lopez - - Cross 31 1 said to the case agent, but whatever information was 2 obtained or heard would have been passed along. 3 what we do. 4 Q. That's That's our job. I know it's your job, but you don't have any 5 firsthand personal knowledge as to what was communicated 6 to the agent, do you? 7 8 A. I can testify to what I communicated to the case agent. 9 THE COURT: But you can't in this case 10 because you don't know which calls that you listened to; 11 right? 12 THE WITNESS: 13 THE COURT: 14 I mean, I thought you told Mr. Cargill you didn't know what calls you listened to. 15 THE WITNESS: 16 THE COURT: 17 Not exactly, no. Not exactly. So you don't know what information you passed on to the case agent. 18 THE WITNESS: Exactly. I would have to go 19 back and see what exact calls I was there for and the 20 information. 21 THE COURT: Sitting here today, in court, 22 you didn't do that, so you don't know what information 23 you passed to the case agent. 24 25 THE WITNESS: Not by memory. BY MR. CARGILL: Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 31 of 85 Pageid#: 1086 Lopez - - Cross 1 Q. 32 You don't know also anything about this trucking 2 company, how many trucks are owned by the owner of the 3 trucking company, do you? 4 A. One of the targets that we were investigating is 5 the owner of the trucking company. We knew that he had 6 several trucks that were -- he owned several trucks in 7 his company. 8 Q. And he had several drivers; correct? 9 A. Correct. 10 Q. Carrying different loads; correct? 11 A. Yes. 12 Q. And you mentioned code words for drugs. Is there 13 a glossary of code words for drugs that you have in your 14 office there? 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. What are the code words? 17 A. There's many code words. 18 T-shirts, pants. There's boys, girls, It depends on the investigation. 19 Q. Pallets? 20 A. Pallets. 21 Q. Pallets is a code word for drugs? 22 A. Not in every case, but in this particular case, 23 we believed that it was, yes. 24 Q. Why? 25 A. Because during that period of time, we believed Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 32 of 85 Pageid#: 1087 Lopez - - Cross 33 1 that the driver was driving a flat bed and when they 2 mentioned pallets, we gave that information to the case 3 agent. 4 transport 30 pallets. 5 pass along the information. 6 7 Q. We told him they're saying they're going to They make that determination. But you in the first instance decide whether it's a code word for drugs or not? 8 A. If we believe so, yes. 9 Q. Based on all these conversations, could you say 10 what type of drugs that you thought these people were 11 carrying? 12 A. No. 13 Q. You couldn't say that in truth, could you? 14 A. No. 15 MR. CARGILL: 16 Your Honor, I'd offer Defendant's 1. 17 THE COURT: 18 MR. HOFFMAN: Thank you, ma'am. Any objection? Absolutely, Your Honor. It 19 has not been authenticated. 20 it's not accurate. 21 the time stamp at the bottom came from. 22 she has not reviewed that and doesn't know about the 23 accuracy of that information. 24 authenticated. 25 We She, in fact, testified She testified she doesn't know where MR. CARGILL: She testified The document has not been He gave it to me. This man Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 33 of 85 Pageid#: 1088 Lopez - - Cross 1 34 gave it to me, Your Honor. 2 MR. HOFFMAN: 3 admissible evidence. 4 of evidence. 5 this witness. 6 That doesn't mean it's You still have to follow the rules The document has not been authenticated by MR. CARGILL: She said it's a synopsis. She 7 just couldn't account for the date stamp on the bottom 8 left-hand corner. 9 10 THE COURT: Is that a synopsis of the type that your office does in these investigations? 11 THE WITNESS: 12 THE COURT: Yes. And can you tell me whether or 13 not the synopsis that's here relates to this 14 investigation? 15 16 THE WITNESS: that was transcribed. 17 18 THE COURT: THE WITNESS: 20 THE COURT: Correct. It's admitted. Overrule the objection; Defense Exhibit 1. 22 23 It's one of the calls that was transcribed that was just played. 19 21 Yes, it's one of the calls (Defendant Exhibit #1 was admitted into evidence). 24 Any redirect? 25 MR. HOFFMAN: Yes, Your Honor. Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 34 of 85 Pageid#: 1089 Lopez - - Redirect 1 2 3 35 REDIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. HOFFMAN: Q. 4 Let's clarify a couple of things, Ms. Lopez. A moment ago, the defense attorney asked you if 5 there were two calls involving his client, George. 6 There were actually five; is that right? We can pull out 7 the transcripts and go through each one? 8 A. 9 10 Yes. THE COURT: many of these involved Mr. Covarrubaiz? 11 THE WITNESS: 12 THE COURT: 13 Sitting here, do you know how I would have to look at them. You don't know of your own personal knowledge. 14 THE WITNESS: 15 We transcribe most of the print calls in an 16 investigation. 17 that. Not by memory. Which ones are used, we don't control 18 THE COURT: 19 THE WITNESS: 20 THE COURT: 21 THE WITNESS: 22 THE COURT: Did you pick out these 20? No, I did not. Somebody else did. Right. Do you know whether there were 23 200, whether there were 50? Do you know how many calls 24 there were in total involved in this particular 25 investigation? Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 35 of 85 Pageid#: 1090 Lopez - - Redirect 1 THE WITNESS: 36 This -- Mr. Covarrubaiz was 2 also -- I'm trying to think. 3 conversations between Mr. Covarrubaiz and Amador. 4 THE COURT: I would say maybe 20 20 involving Mr. Covarrubaiz and 5 Mr. Amador of which there's just been a few played here 6 today; correct? 7 THE WITNESS: 8 THE COURT: 9 THE WITNESS: THE COURT: THE WITNESS: 15 THE COURT: 17 18 Hundreds of calls. And somebody decided to play these 20 for me. 14 16 How many calls? There were hundreds. 12 13 Do you know how many calls this investigation involving Mr. Amador involved? 10 11 Correct. Correct. Go ahead, Mr. Hoffman. BY MR. HOFFMAN: Q. The numbers you just recited to the Court, you don't recall with precision, do you? 19 A. Correct. 20 Q. It's possible there were even thousands of calls 21 in the investigation? 22 A. Correct. 23 Q. It's possible there were 20 or less calls 24 25 involving Mr. Covarrubaiz himself; correct? A. Correct. Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 36 of 85 Pageid#: 1091 Lopez - - Redirect 1 Q. 37 A moment ago, you testified that you don't 2 remember, sitting here, in detail, your conversation 3 with Gregg Mervis? 4 A. Correct. 5 Q. Between January 29 to February 3? 6 A. Correct. 7 Q. But you did talk to him January 29 to February 3? 8 A. Correct. 9 Q. And when you spoke to him, did you speak to him 10 11 about the matter of the recordings we just played? A. Yes. 12 THE COURT: 13 each one of these calls. 14 THE WITNESS: 15 THE COURT: But you didn't talk to him about Right. You would have talked to him 16 about the calls you were monitoring. 17 THE WITNESS: 18 with this particular investigation at the moment. 19 20 I monitored or what's going on THE COURT: Do you remember what it was that you told Mr. Mervis? 21 THE WITNESS: That we believed there was a 22 truck being -- that there was a vehicle going to 23 Virginia with 30 pallets, and to us, it sounded like it 24 was coded. 25 what to do next. So then, you know, Mr. Mervis, they decide We pass along the information as we Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 37 of 85 Pageid#: 1092 Lopez - - Redirect 38 1 get it, whatever we believe is coded language or printed 2 information and we pass that information along. 3 BY MR. HOFFMAN: 4 Q. But the -- 5 A. We, as a whole. 6 Q. As you said earlier, the agent is the one making 7 the final decision about interpreting coded language and 8 things like that; correct? 9 A. Yes. 10 Q. You may, based on your 20 years of experience 11 doing this, you may believe that something is code and 12 you'll pass that on; correct? 13 A. Correct. 14 Q. To Mr. Mervis. 15 A. Correct. 16 Q. As you understand it, he or the agent is the one 17 making the final decision? 18 A. Right. 19 Q. You're talking to these agents multiple times a 20 day; correct? 21 A. Every day that I'm there, yes. 22 Q. Weren't there also circumstances, correct me if 23 I'm wrong, but circumstances where the monitors of these 24 calls would give information to you which you would then 25 discuss with Mr. Mervis? Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 38 of 85 Pageid#: 1093 Lopez - - Redirect 1 A. At times, yes, yes. 39 If I'm not there, if it's 2 not during my shift, they themselves will call Mervis or 3 Vestie or whoever the investigating officer is. 4 Q. What about when you're there? 5 A. When I'm there, I do the phone calls. 6 I talk to the agent. 7 Q. Even if you didn't intercept the call yourself? 8 A. That information is passed along to me and I pass 9 10 it along to an agent. Q. There are calls when you're on a shift that you 11 are not personally monitoring. 12 there with the monitor; correct? You're sitting right 13 A. Correct. 14 Q. The monitor gives that information to you. 15 A. Correct. 16 Q. And you would share that information with Gregg 17 Mervis between January 29 and February 3; correct? 18 A. 19 case. 20 So one call could go to one monitor and another call to 21 another monitor. 22 can go to four different people there. 23 who's always intercepting the call. 24 the other three. 25 Q. Sometimes there are four monitors assigned to a So there are four monitors intercepting calls. It doesn't go to just one person. It's not me It can be one of But on January 29 to February 3, it's your Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 39 of 85 Pageid#: 1094 It Lopez - - Redirect 1 testimony information flowed from monitors to you and 2 you passed that information to Gregg Mervis on those 3 topics? 4 A. 5 6 Yes. 40 Like I said, I don't remember exactly on which of those, but yes. Q. And you also testified a moment ago about 7 deciding whether the call is pertinent or non-pertinent 8 and making that decision, whether it's relevant to the 9 case or not. At the beginning of a wire tap 10 investigation, isn't there some type of briefing you 11 receive from the agents? 12 A. Correct. 13 Q. What happens? Why don't you describe that for the 14 15 Court, at the beginning of a wire tap investigation? A. We have a briefing and we're told basically what 16 to listen for, who's involved in this investigation, 17 whether there's a company involved, whether it's a store 18 involved. 19 for. 20 21 22 Q. We get a briefing on what we need to listen So do you then make your pertinent, non-pertinent decisions based on that briefing? A. Based on that and after listening to calls, we 23 can, you know, we kind of try to determine what is 24 pertinent and what is non-pertinent, what is legitimate 25 and what is not legit. Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 40 of 85 Pageid#: 1095 Mervis - - Direct 1 Q. As time goes on, on a wire tap investigation and 2 you're monitoring these calls day in and day out, does 3 your knowledge base, your familiarity with the 4 investigation grow? 5 A. Yes. 6 Q. Do you incorporate that information in your 7 8 9 decision about pertinent and non-pertinent? A. Yes, and based on the players that we're listening to. 10 MR. HOFFMAN: 11 THE COURT: 12 MR. HOFFMAN: 13 14 Call your next witness. Your Honor, I'd call Special Agent Gregg Mervis. GREGG MERVIS, CALLED AS A WITNESS BY THE GOVERNMENT, 15 SWORN 16 17 Thank you, Your Honor. DIRECT EXAMINATION BY MR. HOFFMAN: 18 Q. Good afternoon. 19 A. Good afternoon. 20 Q. Please introduce yourself to the Court. 21 A. Your Honor, my name is Gregg Mervis. 22 Q. And who do you work for? 23 A. Drug Enforcement Administration. 24 Q. What is your current assignment? 25 A. I'm a special agent at the Special Operations Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 41 of 85 Pageid#: 1096 41 Mervis - - Direct 1 2 3 4 42 Division in Chantilly, Virginia. Q. What are your duties at the Special Operations Division, SOD, in Chantilly, Virginia? A. I'm currently assigned to a bilateral 5 investigation unit. We conduct drug investigations with 6 an international focus. 7 Q. What is your focus? 8 A. Latin America. 9 Q. How long have you been assigned to SOD? 10 A. Approximately six months. 11 Q. What was your assignment prior to SOD? 12 A. I was assigned to the Washington division office, 13 Annandale Task Force, group 12. 14 Q. You were a special agent then? 15 A. Correct. 16 Q. What were your duties there? 17 A. I was assigned to a task force working with the 18 local counterparts handling drug investigations in and 19 around the D.C. metropolitan area. 20 drug cases. Primarily domestic 21 Q. How long did you work on that assignment? 22 A. About five years. 23 Q. And were you with the DEA before that? 24 A. Yes. 25 Q. What were you doing? Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 42 of 85 Pageid#: 1097 Mervis - - Direct 1 2 A. 43 I was an agent assigned to the Baltimore district office, in Baltimore, Maryland. 3 Q. Same thing? 4 A. Correct. 5 Q. How long were you a special agent assigned to the 6 Special agent, just in Baltimore? Baltimore area? 7 A. One year. 8 Q. And before that assignment? 9 A. I was a special agent at the Carracus, Venezuela 10 11 12 country office at the embassy in Carracus. Q. How long were you assigned at the embassy at Carracus? 13 A. About three years. 14 Q. What were you doing there? 15 A. There, I was working drug cases with informants 16 and the Venezuelan counterparts, in Venezuela. 17 Q. Prior to your Venezuela assignment? 18 A. I was assigned to the Imperial County residence 19 office in Imperial, California. 20 Q. Were you a special agent then also? 21 A. Yes, I was. 22 Q. For how long? 23 A. About six years. 24 Q. And prior to that assignment, where were you? 25 A. Prior to that, I was in the DEA academy. That was Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 43 of 85 Pageid#: 1098 Mervis - - Direct 1 my first assignment with DEA, in California. 2 Q. Were you a contract linguist at some point? 3 A. Yes, I was. 4 Q. That was with what agency? 5 A. DEA. 6 Q. What does a contract linguist with the DEA do? 7 A. Translations, interpretations of phone 8 9 10 conversations, body wires. Q. My focus was Spanish. How long were you a contract linguist with a focus of Spanish? 11 A. One year. 12 Q. Have you continued to utilize your Spanish 13 throughout your career with the DEA? 14 A. Yes. 15 Q. And have you taken any type of assessment with 16 17 18 44 DEA in terms of your language skill? A. Yes. Prior to my assignment in Carracus, I was a -- administered a DEA Spanish language exam. 19 Q. What was your score on that? 20 A. It was a four out of five. 21 Q. Does four mean fluent Spanish? 22 A. Yes. 23 Q. Five is what, native; right? 24 A. Correct, native speaker. 25 Q. In your -- how long have you been with the DEA Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 44 of 85 Pageid#: 1099 Mervis - - Direct 1 45 total now? 2 A. About 15 years. 3 Q. In that time, throughout, how frequently have you 4 5 used Spanish? A. Depending on the assignment, when I was in 6 Imperial County and Venezuela, it was daily. 7 it was frequent, dealing with informants. We worked a 8 lot of wires, Spanish-speaking wires. I was case agent 9 on some. 10 Q. These are all drug cases. 11 A. Correct. 12 Q. Spanish. 13 A. Correct. 14 15 16 Annandale, My current assignment is every day dealing with informants who are Spanish speakers. Q. Let's talk about some of your previous 17 investigations. 18 investigations have you been personally involved in, 19 roughly? 20 A. I would say hundreds. 21 Q. How many of those involved wire taps? 22 A. I don't know if I can put a number on it. 23 24 25 Throughout your career, how many drug Numerous, numerous wire taps. Q. How many, portion wise, of the wire tap investigations that you've been personally involved, Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 45 of 85 Pageid#: 1100 Mervis - - Direct 1 46 involved Spanish speakers? 2 A. As far as I can remember, all of them except one. 3 Q. Every single one, but one. 4 A. One in Baltimore, correct, was English. 5 Q. In these investigations, have you sat and 6 monitored yourself? 7 A. Yes. 8 Q. How many times do you think you've monitored that 9 10 yourself? A. I would say, percentage wise, maybe a quarter of 11 them because we have linguists assigned to the cases a 12 lot of times. 13 Q. Of the ones that you sat and monitored, were they 14 Spanish? 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. Very quickly, just kind of walk us through the 17 mechanics of obtaining -- like when you went to obtain a 18 wire tap, just kind of the basic steps you have to walk 19 through yourself. 20 A. Correct. So, as an agent, I would prepare an 21 affidavit for probable cause laying out pretty much the 22 case, the probable cause, the necessity. 23 that affidavit to the prosecutor for him or her to 24 review and then myself and the prosecutor would go 25 before a judge to seek an order for an interception. I would submit Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 46 of 85 Pageid#: 1101 Mervis - - Direct 1 2 3 Q. 47 How is a wire tap used during an investigation, based on your experience? A. The wire tap is used, I would say, as a way to 4 attack an organization rather than an individual. So we 5 look at a wire tap to go after not just the individual 6 using the phone, but to identify the whole structure of 7 the organization. 8 able to infiltrate the particular organization, such as 9 -- say we don't have an informant in the investigation If we have certain means that aren't 10 or the means aren't working, then we'll seek a wire tap 11 as a way to infiltrate the organization, to obtain 12 evidence. 13 You have somebody's voice and you're able to 14 corroborate it with a seizure, a surveillance and other 15 techniques, it's pretty good evidence. 16 17 Q. Do wire taps ever spawn you to, say, conduct surveillance? 18 A. Oh, yes. 19 Q. Do you ever seize evidence as a result of what 20 you hear on the wire tap? 21 A. Yes. 22 Q. Make arrests? 23 A. Yes. 24 Q. In your experience in drug investigations, you've 25 heard drug code before? Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 47 of 85 Pageid#: 1102 Mervis - - Direct 48 1 A. Yes. 2 Q. What is drug code? 3 A. Drug code is frequently used to avoid detection 4 by law enforcement to not reveal the actual drug 5 terminology that the speakers are using. 6 Q. In your experience, you're listening to an 7 intercept call on a wire tap, are the participants in 8 the call talking about "bring me heroin;" "no, how about 9 some cocaine?" Are you hearing them using the actual 10 words of the drugs, like PCP? 11 A. No. 12 Q. What do they do instead? 13 A. They'll use certain words that both speakers know 14 to be terms for drugs, such as cars or in this instance, 15 pallets was used. 16 Q. Is it sometimes different from case to case? 17 A. Oh, yes, it is different. 18 Q. How do you get a feel for it, what the code 19 20 means? A. For me, a lot of it's just experience. It's 21 being the case agent on numerous wires. It's sitting 22 there and reviewing the calls and listening to the 23 calls. 24 you just get a feel for these individuals. 25 listening to their calls and, you know, communications Having been a linguist as well as case agent, You're Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 48 of 85 Pageid#: 1103 Mervis - - Direct 1 on a daily basis, so it becomes evident what's 2 legitimate talk or non-pertinent talk and what's 3 pertinent drug talk. 4 5 Q. In your experience as a DEA special agent, have you employed pen registers? 6 A. Yes. 7 Q. What is a pen register? 8 A. A pen register, once again, requires a Court 9 49 order and that's to get toll information live, as well 10 as the cell sites, as well as location information, real 11 time. 12 Q. 13 Let's shift to this case. You were involved in this case? 14 A. Yes. 15 Q. What was your role in this? 16 A. I was the case agent in Annandale, Virginia. 17 Q. Let's -- just sort of the background of the 18 investigation, what were you investigating as the case 19 agent here? 20 A. We were investigating a drug trafficking 21 organization based out of California that was using 22 tractor trailers primarily to move drug shipments and 23 bulk between California and various destinations, to the 24 east coast. 25 Q. You actually made seizures; correct? Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 49 of 85 Pageid#: 1104 Mervis - - Direct 50 1 A. Correct. 2 Q. And drug seizures? 3 A. Correct. 4 Q. And bulk cash seizures; correct? 5 A. Correct. 6 Q. Those were all coming from the wire taps. 7 A. No. 8 9 10 Some of them came from other means, but primarily wire tap. Q. Did you, based on the wire tap, did you all develop an idea of who the leader was? 11 A. Yes. 12 Q. Who was that? 13 A. It was Everardo Amador, Sr. 14 Q. Based on, you listened to some of the calls? 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. How would you characterize his leadership style? 17 A. I view him as almost a micro manager. He's very 18 detailed, very involved in the process of moving drugs 19 or money. 20 Q. Did you check subscriber information? 21 A. Yes. 22 Q. On him? 23 A. On the phones he was using, yes. 24 Q. To whom are they registered? 25 A. To Everardo Amador. Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 50 of 85 Pageid#: 1105 Mervis - - Direct 51 1 Q. He registered them in his own name? 2 A. He did. 3 Q. Did you check the defendant's subscriber info? 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. Who was his registered to? 6 A. George Covarrubaiz. 7 Q. In his own name. 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. The first seizure in this case was for what? What 10 11 12 did you all seize? A. The first seizure involved in this case was money. 13 Q. Where did that occur? 14 A. In California. 15 Q. You were in Virginia at the time though, correct? 16 A. Right. 17 Q. Approximately how much money? 18 A. Approximately $400,000. 19 Q. Was there another seizure? 20 A. Yes. 21 Q. Prior to February 3? 22 A. Yes. 23 Q. And what was that seizure? 24 A. The seizure was approximately 1.8 million 25 dollars. Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 51 of 85 Pageid#: 1106 Mervis - - Direct 52 1 Q. And that occurred in California also? 2 A. Yes. 3 Q. And you were in Virginia at that time; correct? 4 A. Correct. 5 Q. What was your role -- back up. Are you familiar 6 with the facts, the stop of the defendant, in December 7 of 2013? 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. What was your role in connection with that stop? 10 A. My role, I was monitoring the pen register on the 11 defendant's cellular telephone at the time. 12 Q. So you were watching his location? 13 A. Correct. 14 Q. After that stop, did you learn the driver's 15 identity? 16 A. Yes. 17 Q. Let's fast forward to January 29, 2014. 18 Were you working this day? 19 A. Yes. 20 Q. What happened on that day in connection with this 21 22 23 investigation? A. Los Angeles DEA was cutting a wire tap and they began to intercept phone calls involving the defendant. 24 Q. How did you learn that? 25 A. I learned it from Blanca, the head linguist there Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 52 of 85 Pageid#: 1107 Mervis - - Direct 1 53 in Los Angeles. 2 Q. How did she contact you? 3 A. Via telephone. 4 Q. And what did you discuss with Blanca? 5 A. Essentially that there was conversations 6 intercepted that she believed were indicative of a 7 pending drug shipment from California, possibly to the 8 east coast. 9 10 Q. And did you in the days to come continue to talk with Blanca? 11 A. Yes. 12 Q. Did you two discuss any code language or code 13 word that may have been intercepted on the wires in 14 California? 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. Do you recall what code words were being used 17 18 around that time? A. One code used, I believe, was pallets. There was 19 a reference made to 30 pallets in a conversation between 20 the defendant and Amador, Sr. 21 conversation intercepted between Amador, Sr., and his 22 employee, Tarula, where there was reference made to a 23 blue car coming by essentially to pick up the 24 merchandise. 25 Q. Blue car. There was also a Was that significant to you? Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 53 of 85 Pageid#: 1108 Mervis - - Direct 54 1 A. Yes. 2 Q. Why? 3 A. Because we knew based on the prior stop in 4 December 2013, we knew the defendant to have a blue 5 tractor trailer. 6 Q. And a moment ago, you mentioned the words 7 pallets. 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. Was that significant in any way to you? 10 A. Well, the number 30, which was discussed between You and Blanca Lopez discussed that? 11 the defendant and Amador, Sr., was significant because 12 in further conversation between Amador, Sr., and other 13 individuals, the number 32, 34, around 30, was 14 consistent throughout that conversation. 15 had stopped the defendant in December, there were no 16 pallets on the tractor trailer. 17 containers at the time on his flat bed. 18 reference in these conversations in January of 2014 19 about containers being transported. 20 containers not to be transported on pallets so that sort 21 of raised our suspicion. Also, when we He was transporting There was We knew the 22 Q. The stop occurred on February 3; correct? 23 A. Correct. 24 Q. Of 2014. 25 So let's talk about your actions and your involvement and your knowledge from January 29 to Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 54 of 85 Pageid#: 1109 Mervis - - Direct 1 February 3. 2 3 55 During that time, were you working with anyone else on this investigation in addition to Blanca Lopez? 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. Who else were you working with? 6 A. On the Virginia side, it was myself; Task Force 7 Officer Paul Loconti; Task Force Officer Dave Cutting; 8 and Special Agent Julie Whisenhunt. 9 Q. What was Paul Laconti doing? 10 A. Each one of us had a role in our side of the 11 investigation. Paul's role was to interface or contact 12 Verizon, which was the provider of the defendant's cell 13 phone, to get updated location information. 14 obtained a pen register on the defendant's cell phone 15 and his job, like I said, was to contact Verizon, 16 provide updates to the team as far as location. 17 18 Q. We had Let's move forward -- and you're working with these people how frequently during this time period? 19 A. With Laconti and Cutting? 20 Q. Uh-huh. 21 A. Daily. 22 Q. All of those days, 29 through the 3rd? 23 A. Absolutely, yeah. 24 Q. How frequently are you talking to Blanca Lopez 25 We're a team, so we're working this. during this period? Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 55 of 85 Pageid#: 1110 Mervis - - Direct 1 A. I'm getting updates. 56 I wouldn't say every call 2 she's calling me, but periodically, she'd call me with 3 updates, something she felt significant for us to know. 4 She'd pass on the lead or the information. 5 Q. Would you share that information with your team? 6 A. Yes. 7 Q. Was Paul Laconti sharing the pen register data 8 with you? 9 A. Yes. 10 Q. So you were receiving the wire tap information 11 from Blanca Lopez and you're receiving the pen register 12 data from Paul Laconti. 13 A. Correct. 14 Q. Let's fast forward to January 30, January 31. 15 16 What's going on in the investigation at that time? A. At that time, LA's intercepting additional phone 17 calls between Amador, Sr., Tarula; Amador, Sr., and 18 Juan; the other individuals involved in the 19 organization, that are basically discussing this pending 20 shipment -- how it's supposed to be packaged, where it 21 should be concealed, how it should be labeled. 22 detailed information's coming across. 23 Q. Pretty Of your own recollection, what do you recall 24 about -- I think you just said something about where it 25 should be located. Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 56 of 85 Pageid#: 1111 Mervis - - Direct 1 A. Correct. 2 Q. Do you have recollection about that? 3 A. Yes. There was a call between Amador, Sr., and 4 Tarula where Amador, Sr., was essentially instructing 5 Tarula to place a quantity of narcotics in the area 6 where -- I believe the area where the current passes, 7 which we interpreted to be the battery box. 8 Q. Did he use the word narcotics? 9 A. No. 10 Q. How did you learn that for the first time? How 11 did you hear this information about the wire? 12 A. From Blanca. 13 Q. February 1, February 2, you were working on the 14 investigation those days? 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. What is happening with this investigation on 17 18 57 those two days? A. I'm in contact with TFO Laconti, who is providing 19 location updates as the defendant is moving east from 20 California. 21 far as contacts between the defendant and Senior where 22 -- Amador, Sr., where the defendant is providing updates 23 regarding his location. 24 Q. 25 time? As well, I'm getting updates from Blanca as Did you yourself come down to Harrisonburg some Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 57 of 85 Pageid#: 1112 Mervis - - Direct 58 1 A. Yes; on the night of February 2. 2 Q. Did you come down by yourself or with others? 3 A. With others. 4 Q. Paul Laconti come with you? 5 A. Yes. 6 Q. And the others you mentioned a moment ago? 7 A. Yes. 8 There was actually more than that. There was, I think, about six of us. 9 Q. The team of six or so of y'all came down? 10 A. Correct. 11 Q. To Harrisonburg? 12 A. Yes. 13 Q. And what happens next? 14 A. On the morning of February 3, early morning -- 15 Q. The day of the stop? 16 A. The day of the stop, call it like three or four 17 in the morning, we met with VSP, a team from VSP, at the 18 hotel there in Harrisonburg. 19 Q. When you say VSP, what do you mean? 20 A. Virginia State Police. 21 Q. Multiple people from Virginia State Police? 22 A. Yes. 23 Q. And what happened during the meeting with your 24 25 team and the Virginia State Police? A. Like I said, TFO Cutting was the primary point of Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 58 of 85 Pageid#: 1113 Mervis - - Direct 59 1 contact between our team and Virginia State Police. 2 gave a briefing to the state police regarding the 3 defendant heading east. He suspected him to be 4 transporting narcotics. TFO Laconti provided the latest 5 location update. 6 set up more or less a dragnet, for lack of a better 7 word, on I-81. 8 We'd pick up the defendant's truck and hand that off to 9 the state police for them to conduct the traffic stop. 10 Q. He We set up a plan for DEA, our team, to So we'd essentially set up surveillance. During this meeting, did a member of your team or 11 your team make a specific request or give instruction to 12 the Virginia State Police troopers? 13 A. Yes. 14 Q. What was it? 15 A. The request was to conduct a wall off stop. 16 Q. What is a wall off stop? 17 A. A wall off stop is basically -- at the time, our 18 investigation was ongoing. We had other tractor 19 trailers in play, as far as the overall organization, 20 that we believed to be transporting bulk currency. We 21 didn't at the time want to reveal our entire 22 investigation to the defendant because we didn't want it 23 to be compromised as far as the other tractor trailers. 24 We also did not have Amador, Sr., in custody at the 25 time, so we didn't want to jeopardize those angles. Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 59 of 85 Pageid#: 1114 Mervis - - Direct 1 Q. Okay. So those are the reasons for conducting a 2 wall off stop. 3 a wall off stop? 4 A. 60 How do you actually go about conducting We asked the state police if they could develop 5 their own probable cause to conduct the stop and pretty 6 much, that's where we left it. 7 Q. You were at this meeting; right? 8 A. Yes. 9 Q. And did you all share all of the details of your 10 four-month investigation with the troopers that were 11 there that day? 12 A. No. 13 Q. How much did you give them? 14 A. Pretty much just the basics; that this is the 15 truck we expect to be coming east, the defendant being 16 the driver. 17 about possibly drugs being concealed in the battery box. 18 That's a possible stash location within the truck. 19 I said, the latest location update and then we set up 20 the plan and that was pretty much it. 21 22 Q. Okay. I believe we had information at the time Like Were you involved -THE COURT: When you say wall off, that 23 means to do a stop of this defendant, but not let him 24 know that other things were going on. 25 THE WITNESS: That's correct. Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 60 of 85 Pageid#: 1115 Mervis - - Direct 1 2 THE COURT: THE WITNESS: 4 THE COURT: THE WITNESS: THE COURT: 9 THE WITNESS: 11 Do you know when Amador was That was this summer, I believe. 8 10 That's right. arrested? 6 7 That's what the wall off part is, right? 3 5 THE COURT: So it was the summer of '14. Correct. So it was substantially after the stop involving Mr. Covarrubaiz. 12 THE WITNESS: Correct. 13 MR. HOFFMAN: Your Honor, with everyone's 14 15 16 17 18 19 61 consent, I can proffer the date of that. THE COURT: to interrupt. I was just asking. I don't mean Go ahead. Did you tell the state police the name of the defendant? THE WITNESS: I don't know if we said the 20 name, but we suspected him to be the driver because we 21 stopped him in December of 2013 while monitoring the 22 same cell phone in his name. 23 where Amador, Sr., referred to the defendant as George. 24 So it was, you know, highly probable that it was going 25 to be the defendant driving. We intercepted calls in LA Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 61 of 85 Pageid#: 1116 Mervis - - Direct 1 2 3 BY MR. HOFFMAN: Q. So it was the same cell phone number that you were monitoring on the pen? 4 A. The pen back in 2013? 5 Q. Yes. 6 A. Yes, same number. 7 Q. From the first stop. 8 A. Correct. 9 Q. Okay. So please take a moment and describe for 10 the Court kind of what the catch plan was, so to speak, 11 for that morning. 12 13 A. Okay. So that morning, the DEA team set up along -- staggered, I should say, along I-81, different exits. 14 Q. How far spread out were you? 15 A. We were probably spread out, call it, I don't 16 know, ten miles maybe, more or less. 17 Q. Where were you positioned? 18 A. One of those exits, one of the overpass or exits 19 20 21 22 23 62 along I-81. Q. Were you going to be one of the first ones to intercept? A. No. the go-to. We had a TFO in our group that was kind of He was very good at observing traffic. 24 Q. What was the plan? What was going to happen? 25 A. He was the furthest south. He would pick up the Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 62 of 85 Pageid#: 1117 Mervis - - Direct 63 1 defendant's vehicle travelling north on I-81, get in 2 behind it and we'll fall in behind it as the vehicle was 3 proceeding north on I-81. 4 Q. With lights on? 5 A. No, in regular vehicles, just surveillance. Then 6 at some point, TFO Cutting, who was talking to Virginia 7 State Police, would turn over surveillance. 8 call us off and give Virginia State Police the 9 surveillance and operation. 10 Q. He would DEA would establish surveillance of the 11 defendant's vehicle coming up 81 and once you were 12 comfortable that was the right one, you would pass off, 13 do the hand-off to the state troopers and they would do 14 the stop? 15 A. That's right. 16 Q. Did you participate in that plan as executed? 17 A. Yes. 18 Q. Did you personally observe the defendant's 19 vehicle? 20 A. Yes. 21 Q. Anything remarkable about the vehicle? Anything 22 important that you noticed that day that fit into the 23 investigation? 24 25 A. it. There was transporting containers on the back of It was blue. Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 63 of 85 Pageid#: 1118 Mervis - - Direct 1 Q. So there were containers? 2 A. There were containers. 3 Q. Did you see any pallets? 4 A. No. 5 Q. Did you see 30 pallets? 6 A. No. 7 Q. Did you see any tacos? 8 A. No. 9 Q. No tacos. Did you see any rolls? 10 A. Rolls, no. 11 Q. No rolls. 12 64 I think you said a moment ago, what was the color of the tractor itself? 13 A. Blue. 14 Q. And that was the same color as the previous stop? 15 A. Yes. 16 17 THE COURT: Were you around, physically around, back in December at the previous stop? 18 THE WITNESS: 19 THE COURT: 20 THE WITNESS: 21 THE COURT: 22 THE WITNESS: 23 THE COURT: No. Was DEA trailing the truck then? Yes. Just as it was trailing it -Same set-up. You surveil it for a while, you 24 find out where he is, you call the state police, you 25 turn it over to them and they make the stop. Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 64 of 85 Pageid#: 1119 Mervis - - Direct 1 THE WITNESS: 2 THE COURT: 3 pulled over, a drug dog was there. 4 dog alerted. 5 found. 65 Correct. Back in December, the truck was Real quick, the drug The truck was searched, but no drugs were 6 THE WITNESS: 7 THE COURT: Correct. Were you present on the scene 8 back in December or was that just left to the state 9 police? 10 11 THE WITNESS: THE COURT: Were there any DEA guys that came on the scene or was it just the state police? 14 15 I was in Annandale. 12 13 No, I wasn't present. THE WITNESS: I'm pretty confident it was just state police. 16 THE COURT: Was that part of this wall off 17 strategy? You didn't want to let him know the DEA was on 18 to him in a big way? 19 20 21 THE WITNESS: That's correct. BY MR. HOFFMAN: Q. So after you observed -- 22 THE COURT: Let me ask you this. 23 Back before the December stop, what led you 24 all to set up this same sort of staggered spread on 25 I-81? Did you have phone call from the wire tap Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 65 of 85 Pageid#: 1120 Mervis - - Direct 1 66 information that there was going to be a shipment? 2 THE WITNESS: Yes -- well, what happened 3 there were conversations intercepted in LA where Amador, 4 Sr., was discussing a pending shipment. 5 I'm not wrong, he dropped his phone, he terminated his 6 phone. So at the time of the stop, the first stop of the 7 defendant, nobody was listening. 8 timing of that conversation and the fact that the 9 defendant was heading east around the same time of this I believe, if But based on the 10 pending shipment, we believed him to be transporting a 11 shipment of narcotics. 12 THE COURT: 13 phone, what do you mean by that? 14 15 THE WITNESS: THE COURT: THE WITNESS: No, no, no, no. That's a term we use. Discontinued use. 20 21 He didn't just physically drop it on the ground. 18 19 He terminated use. He ceased making calls. 16 17 When you say Amador dropped his THE COURT: He discontinued use of his phone. 22 THE WITNESS: 23 THE COURT: Correct. But back then in December, just 24 as later on in January, you thought the defendant was 25 bringing a drug shipment east from California, to the Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 66 of 85 Pageid#: 1121 Mervis - - Direct 1 67 east. 2 THE WITNESS: 3 THE COURT: Correct. So you had this staggered set-up 4 and the same plan to turn it over to the Virginia State 5 Police. They didn't find anything. 6 went on his way. 7 THE WITNESS: 8 THE COURT: 9 10 He got a warning and Correct. You guys just continued the investigation and went on. BY MR. HOFFMAN: 11 Q. The drug alerted then previously; correct? 12 A. It did. 13 THE COURT: When I first saw the video, I 14 was wondering why that dog was on the scene in two 15 shakes. 16 there and it's because it was planned. 17 18 19 20 It was within a minute or two that dog was I got it. Go ahead, Mr. Hoffman. BY MR. HOFFMAN: Q. It sounds like, correct me if I'm wrong, this time, you had live wire taps? 21 A. Yes, much more information. 22 Q. Involving the defendant himself? 23 A. Yes, much more information the second time. 24 Q. Let's pick up where you left off. 25 So you've got your eyes on the defendant's vehicle. You see that it's Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 67 of 85 Pageid#: 1122 Mervis - - Cross 68 1 a flat bed, there's no pallets, no tacos. It's blue. 2 What happens next? 3 A. So the DEA team surveils the truck as it proceeds 4 north on 81. Eventually, the operation is turned over 5 to the Virginia State Police and they conduct the 6 traffic stop and it's their ball from there. 7 MR. HOFFMAN: 8 THE COURT: 9 10 11 14 15 16 17 Mr. Cargill. CROSS-EXAMINATION BY MR. CARGILL: Q. 12 13 Thank you, Your Honor. Good afternoon, sir. When you say the operation was turned over to Virginia State Police, what do you mean? A. I mean, to conduct the traffic stop. That was their part of the operation. Q. Their operation was to develop their own probable cause to support the stop; correct? 18 A. Correct. 19 Q. And then conduct the stop. 20 A. Correct. 21 Q. And then I take it if they found drugs, they 22 would call you in and you would then take over the 23 investigation. 24 25 A. If they found drugs, yes, they would eventually call us in. Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 68 of 85 Pageid#: 1123 Mervis - - Cross 1 Q. But it was their -- it was their province to 2 develop the probable cause to stop and to stop the 3 vehicle; correct? 4 5 6 A. We asked them, yes, to use their probable cause to stop the vehicle. Q. So if they didn't have probable cause to stop the 7 vehicle, if they didn't develop their probable cause, 8 they were not empowered to stop the vehicle; correct? 9 A. I believe we said if they couldn't find probable 10 cause, we believed based on our information from Los 11 Angeles, there were drugs in that vehicle and they 12 should stop it. 13 Q. So you directed them to stop or not? 14 A. What do you mean, directed? 15 Q. Did you direct them to stop the vehicle or not? 16 A. We provided them the information to stop, sure. 17 Q. So you told them to stop the vehicle? 18 A. Yes, as part of -- 19 Q. When? 20 A. In the briefing. 21 Q. In the briefing at the hotel in the morning? 22 A. Correct. 23 Q. So this part about develop your own probable 24 25 69 cause really was meaningless? A. No. That was to set up the wall, as far as the Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 69 of 85 Pageid#: 1124 Mervis - - Cross 1 wall off stop. 2 cause, that's the way we wanted the stop to take place. 70 If they could develop their own probable 3 Q. So where were you when this stop did occur? 4 A. Off the side of the road, off 81. 5 Q. You weren't on the scene of what you knew to be a 6 stop? 7 A. No. 8 Q. Were any other DEA agents there? 9 A. No. 10 Q. Did you memorialize in a report that you had 11 directed them to stop this vehicle? 12 A. I did not, no. 13 Q. Did anybody memorialize in any DEA 6, in any 14 report, that the Virginia State Police had been directed 15 to stop this vehicle? 16 A. Not that I'm aware of. 17 Q. No one? 18 A. Not that I'm aware of. 19 Q. Isn't that something you would ordinarily note in 20 a report, that you had directed a stop? 21 A. 22 stop. 23 Virginia State Police. 24 25 Q. I don't know if we'd put that in, like directed a We'd put in there we coordinated the stop with In each one of the reports I've seen, everyone describes this as a traffic stop; correct? Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 70 of 85 Pageid#: 1125 Mervis - - Cross 1 A. I don't know. I haven't seen all the reports. 2 Q. Have you seen the reports of Mr. Laconti? 3 A. Not recently. 4 Q. Are you the lead case agent? 5 A. Yes. 6 Q. Have you reviewed the reports? 7 A. Yes. 8 Q. Have you seen a single report where any agent 9 Maybe back then. memorializes that this was a directed stop? 10 A. No, not that I'm aware of. 11 Q. So your probable cause to stop this vehicle, I 12 take it, was that you spoke with Ms. Lopez about these 13 recorded calls; correct? 14 A. That was part of it, yes. 15 Q. And she told you that there was mention of 16 17 18 19 pallets on the vehicle; correct? A. There was a mention between Amador, Sr., and the defendant about 30 pallets being involved, yes. Q. 30 pallets. And to this point of the 20 investigation, there had been two seizures, one -- both 21 of them in California; correct? 22 A. Correct. 23 Q. And both of them involving money; correct? 24 A. Correct. 25 Q. One for $400,000, one for 1.8 million dollars; Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 71 of 85 Pageid#: 1126 71 Mervis - - Cross 72 1 correct? 2 A. Correct. 3 Q. No seizures of drugs at that point; correct? 4 A. Not at this part of the investigation, no. 5 Q. So no seizures of drugs. Only seizures of money; 6 correct? 7 A. Well, there were seizures of drugs. This is kind 8 of -- how can I say this? There's one big case and 9 there's another side of this where we did seize drugs 10 11 back in early, like, the spring of 2013. Q. But we're talking about this part of the case, 12 the case involving Mr. Amador and allegedly Mr. 13 Covarrubaiz. 14 A. I understand. 15 Q. In this part of the case, there were two seizures 16 and only of money; correct? 17 A. That's correct. 18 Q. To this point in the investigation, had you 19 seized any drugs where anybody involved in the 20 investigation had described those drugs as pallets? 21 A. No. 22 Q. So this conclusion that pallets referred to drugs 23 24 25 was a hunch, I take it, on your part? A. Correct. That was -- yeah, based on my training, yeah, and additional calls as well. Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 72 of 85 Pageid#: 1127 Mervis - - Cross 1 2 Q. And these additional calls, they involved other people besides Mr. Covarrubaiz; correct? 3 A. That's correct. 4 Q. Most of them actually involved Mr. Tarula; 5 correct? 6 A. 7 8 9 73 I don't know if it was most, but there were a significant number of calls with Tarula, yes. Q. How many trucks were owned, operated by this trucking company? 10 A. They had several trucks. 11 Q. Several trucks; five, six, trucks? 12 A. I would think, yes. 13 Q. How many of them were blue? 14 A. Oh, I don't know. 15 Q. You think there was only one blue truck? 16 A. I don't know. 17 Q. So if you had gone to a judge on February 2 of 18 2014 with your probable cause to search this truck, what 19 would you have said to the judge? 20 21 22 A. I would have provided all the phone calls between the defendant and Mr. Amador, Sr. -Q. And you would have said -- what did those calls 23 indicate to you? What would you have said to the judge 24 about those calls? 25 A. Which calls? Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 73 of 85 Pageid#: 1128 Mervis - - Cross 1 Q. 74 The ones you would have mentioned to the judge in 2 trying to get probable cause to search this truck. 3 would you have said? 4 5 6 7 A. What About the calls between Amador, Sr., and Covarrubaiz? Q. The ones that would have supported your request for a warrant. 8 A. I would have said there's calls regarding 30 9 pallets. There's further calls between Amador, Sr., and 10 the other individuals referring to the packages, black 11 and white; where certain packages should be stored 12 within the truck; the blue car coming, you know. 13 Q. So you would have mentioned all that. 14 judge says how many trucks are involved in the 15 operation, what would you have said? When the 16 A. I would have said there's numerous trucks. 17 Q. When the judge says how many of them were blue, 18 what would you had said? 19 A. I don't know. 20 Q. When the judge said are you sure about this 21 conversation about placement of these items in the 22 battery box involved Mr. Covarrubaiz's truck, what would 23 you have said? 24 A. I would have said I believe it does. 25 Q. On what basis? Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 74 of 85 Pageid#: 1129 Mervis - - Cross 1 A. 75 Based on the fact the defendant and Amador, Sr., 2 talked about this pending shipment about the defendant 3 picking up approximately 30 pallets. 4 approximately 30 was consistently thrown out in multiple 5 conversations. 6 7 Q. The number 30 or The blue car, the fact -- Pardon me, but in Spanish, there are two different words for car and truck, aren't there? 8 A. Yeah, there's two different words. 9 Q. What is the word for car? 10 A. Carro. 11 Q. And for truck? 12 A. Troca. 13 Q. Or camion? 14 A. Camion; could be. 15 Q. The word for car and truck are not confused in 16 Spanish. 17 A. They are. 18 Q. Would you also have told the judge you stopped They're distinctly different words; correct? 19 this same vehicle in or near Harrisonburg in December of 20 2014 and found no drugs? 21 A. Yes. 22 Q. You would have said that; correct? 23 A. Yes. 24 Q. You would have said, back then, you suspect there 25 would be drugs in the truck; correct? Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 75 of 85 Pageid#: 1130 Mervis - - Cross 76 1 A. The first time? 2 Q. Back in 2013. 3 A. We suspected there were drugs. 4 Q. You would have said we suspected there were drugs 5 there then and we were wrong, but now we suspect there 6 are drugs again? 7 A. Correct. 8 Q. Based on this information, you thought there was 9 10 a load of drugs originating in California and heading where? 11 A. To the east coast. 12 Q. Where on the east coast? 13 A. We knew that that organization had a customer 14 base in New Jersey, for instance; Boston; Philadelphia; 15 New Jersey. 16 Q. You had already stopped this same truck in the 17 Harrisonburg area in December and found nothing; 18 correct? 19 A. That's correct. 20 Q. In your own mind, wouldn't that seem to indicate 21 to you perhaps you ought to stop him before Harrisonburg 22 and the likelihood that you would find something would 23 be greater? 24 25 A. I don't know why. The customer base, as far as our knowledge, was all north of Harrisonburg. Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 76 of 85 Pageid#: 1131 Mervis - - Cross 1 2 Q. You found nothing when you searched him in December of 2013 in Harrisonburg, though; right? 3 A. That's right. 4 Q. You thought the drugs were in the truck when he 5 left California; correct? 6 A. Correct. 7 Q. Did you stop him in California? 8 A. No. 9 Q. Did you stop him in Arizona? 10 A. No. 11 Q. Texas? 12 A. No. 13 Q. Arkansas? 14 You were tracking him all the way across the country; correct? 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. Did you stop him when he got into Virginia, 17 77 southwest Virginia? 18 A. No. 19 Q. Did you know whether he had off-loaded anything 20 from that truck in between California and when he was 21 stopped in Harrisonburg, Virginia? 22 A. No. 23 Q. You had no idea what he had done with anything on 24 that truck between California and when he was stopped in 25 Harrisonburg; right? Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 77 of 85 Pageid#: 1132 Mervis - - Cross 1 A. 78 There were calls, like I said, between the 2 defendant and Amador, Sr., as he's moving east. 3 was no conversation regarding him having dropped 4 anything along the way. There 5 Q. But he was stating where he was though; correct? 6 A. Periodically, yes, he'd provide updates. 7 Q. As he went across the country? 8 9 THE COURT: or Arkansas. 10 11 12 13 Said he had a shower in Arizona THE WITNESS: Yeah, exactly. BY MR. CARGILL: Q. So you didn't listen to any of these conversations yourself, I take it? 14 A. I did, a handful of them. 15 Q. A handful; when? 16 A. More or less January 31, January 30, maybe even 17 18 19 into the weekend, February 1, February 2. Q. Did you participate in the request to get the pen register on Mr. Covarrubaiz's phone? 20 A. Yes. 21 Q. You did. 22 Did you provide the information that went on the application to get that pen register? 23 A. Yes. 24 Q. Now, I take it the most that could be said about 25 what you believe Mr. Covarrubaiz was tractor-trailering Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 78 of 85 Pageid#: 1133 Mervis - - Cross 1 79 in his truck was some quantity of narcotics; correct? 2 A. You said the most I could say? 3 Q. Yes, about what he was carrying. 4 A. We believed, correct, to be a shipment of 5 6 narcotics. Q. But you couldn't say whether it was cocaine or 7 heroin or type of narcotics. 8 narcotics; right? 9 A. You thought it was I think we suspected it to be cocaine and heroin 10 because there was a reference, I believe, to white and 11 black. 12 Q. Could you state under oath that you believed 13 based on those conversations that he was transporting 14 cocaine and heroin? 15 A. Believed it? Sure. 16 Q. Under oath, you'd say that? 17 A. Referencing white and black, yeah. 18 19 To me, when you're differentiating that, that could mean, yeah. Q. Did the varying numbers of pallets or other items 20 that were listed mentioned in these telephone calls, 21 anywhere from 30 to 34 to 32, to 15 and 17 and 22 and 22 11, the various numbers that we heard in these telephone 23 conversations, did that perhaps lead you to believe 24 there might have been other shipments involved with 25 other truck drivers? Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 79 of 85 Pageid#: 1134 Mervis - - Redirect 1 A. No. 2 Q. You didn't. 3 A. I believe it was all in reference to this 4 particular shipment. 5 Q. Even if there were different numbers involved? 6 A. When you're referencing the 15 and 17 and the 7 smaller numbers, possibly there was two customers 8 involved. 9 going to Customer A and a portion was going to Customer 10 B and they want to differentiate there between the two. 11 12 Q. So a portion of the narcotic shipment was Who made the call as to which of these phone calls were relevant to this trip? 13 A. What do you mean, relevant? 14 Q. Who made the call -- 15 A. I would get periodic updates from Blanca. 16 Q. So she made the call to which of these calls 17 related to this trip? She did? 18 A. She would call me, yeah. 19 Q. Is she a DEA agent? 20 A. No. 21 MR. CARGILL: Thank you, sir. 22 THE WITNESS: Thank you. 23 THE COURT: 24 MR. HOFFMAN: 25 Any redirect, Mr. Hoffman? Yes, Your Honor. REDIRECT EXAMINATION Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 80 of 85 Pageid#: 1135 80 Mervis - - Redirect 1 2 3 81 BY MR. HOFFMAN: Q. Agent Mervis, a moment ago, you testified about cash seizures that were made? 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. Based on your investigation at the time, what did 6 you believe the cash was from? 7 A. Narcotics proceeds. 8 Q. Why? 9 A. Based on the way it was packaged. 10 Q. What do you mean, the way the cash was packaged? 11 A. Correct. 12 Q. How? 13 A. So, the cash would be packaged, taped, bound. I 14 don't remember these particular two seizures, but a lot 15 of times, it will have the denomination on there or a 16 label on the package of currency so the individual who's 17 receiving it knows the denomination or to who that 18 particular package of money is to go to. 19 Q. So it was the packaging? The packaging was one of 20 the things that led you all to believe it was drug 21 related? 22 A. Drug related and quite frankly, the amount. 23 1.8 million dollars, that's a lot of money. Looking at 24 it like trying to think legitimately, what could 25 1.8 million in cash be derived from? I don't know too Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 81 of 85 Pageid#: 1136 Mervis - - Redirect 82 1 many businesses that involve 1.8 million dollars in cash 2 being transported in bulk in a tractor trailer. 3 4 Q. And those seizures came out of this investigation? 5 A. Yes. 6 Q. Do you recall the location of the seizures -- 7 excuse me, where the money in the vehicle was, where it 8 was discovered? 9 A. I don't. 10 11 THE COURT: either of those seizures? 12 13 Was Mr. Covarrubaiz involved in THE WITNESS: No. BY MR. HOFFMAN: 14 Q. But the drug trafficking organization was. 15 A. Yes, Amador, Sr., was directly involved in both. 16 Q. Is that the same Amador, Sr., that was talking to 17 this man? 18 A. Yes. 19 Q. A moment ago, defense counsel walked you through 20 some of the things that you might identify for a judge 21 as part of your probable cause; right? 22 A. Yes. 23 Q. I think earlier you testified that you actually 24 had subscriber information on the phone that the 25 defendant had that day; correct? Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 82 of 85 Pageid#: 1137 Mervis - - Redirect 83 1 A. Yes. 2 Q. You also had a pen register order and active on 3 that phone; correct? 4 A. Yes. 5 Q. Would you have included that in your probable 6 cause statement? 7 A. Yes. 8 Q. Would you have included the previous stop in your 9 probable cause statement? 10 A. Yes. 11 Q. What about any of the observations that you made 12 on the road before the case was -- the stop was 13 officially and kind of finally passed off to Virginia 14 State Police? 15 A. Yes. 16 Q. A moment ago, you testified under oath, white and 17 black could mean cocaine and heroin. 18 your basis for that? 19 A. Yes. Can you explain Cocaine in its powder form is white in 20 color and heroin, a lot of times, is a darker color, 21 substance. 22 black. 23 Q. So a lot of times, it's referred to as Are you aware of the legitimate purpose of the 24 business you were investigating, Jack Rabbit Express, 25 what their legitimate loads were? Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 83 of 85 Pageid#: 1138 Mervis - - Redirect 1 A. 84 I believe they legitimately were hauling 2 machinery parts, like, for instance, crane parts. 3 reference to the defendant, it was these metal 4 containers, almost like dumpsters or containers. 5 6 7 Q. Ever had a discussion about pallets and their legitimate use? A. Not that I'm aware of. 8 MR. HOFFMAN: 9 THE COURT: 10 In Thank you, Your Honor. Mr. Cargill, anything further for this witness? 11 MR. CARGILL: No. Thank you. 12 THE COURT: 13 (Conclusion of testimony). You may stand down. Thank you. 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 84 of 85 Pageid#: 1139 85 1 INDEX 2 WITNESS FOR GOVT. Direct Cross Redirect 3 Blanca Lopez 2 21 35 4 Gregg Mervis 41 68 80 6 EXHIBIT NO. Marked Admitted 7 Govt. #1-20 13 20 8 Govt. #1B 13 20 9 Deft. #1 24 34 5 10 11 12 13 14 "I certify that the foregoing is a correct transcript 15 from the record of proceedings in the above-entitled 16 matter. 17 18 19 /s/ Sonia Ferris October 31, 2014" 20 21 22 23 24 25 Case 5:14-cr-00019-MFU Document 76 Filed 10/31/14 Page 85 of 85 Pageid#: 1140