# United States v. Antonio Perrone, Ramon Emilio Gomez and Israel Perez, Antonio Perrone and Ramon Emilio Gomez

> Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit · June 13, 1991 · 936 F.2d 1403

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9481752

## Case

- **Full name:** UNITED STATES of America, Appellee, v. Antonio PERRONE, Ramon Emilio Gomez and Israel Perez, Defendants, Antonio Perrone and Ramon Emilio Gomez, Defendants-Appellants
- **Court:** Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit
- **Decided:** June 13, 1991
- **Citations:** 936 F.2d 1403; 1991 U.S. App. LEXIS 12137
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Concurring in part by Lumbard
- **Judges:** Lumbard, Cardamone, Lasker
- **Cited by:** 46 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- **Yellow flag:** Modified by United States v. Antonio Perrone, Ramon Emilio Gomez, and Israel Perez, Antonio Perrone and Ramon Emilio Gomez, 949 F.2d 36 (1991).
- Negative treatments: 1
- Distinguished by: 0
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9481752

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- holding that sentence should be based on amount of precursor chemicals possessed by the defendant, rather than on the amount of cocaine that could have been manufactured with the precursors
- noting, in the course of upholding the denial of a suppression motion, that “the agents in fact did not read” the warrants

## Opinion text

LUMBARD, Circuit Judge,
concurring in part and dissenting in part:
I concur in the affirmance of Perrone’s convictions and in the remand to the district court for resentencing.
I dissent from the reversal of Gomez’s convictions. Based on the proof before the jury, as is fully set forth in the majority opinion, I believe there was sufficient evidence to support Gomez’s convictions. We must remember that the jury heard the witnesses’ testimony and listened to defense counsel’s attempt to explain the part Gomez played in the offense. Obviously, the jury was not persuaded; it did not believe that Gomez had no guilty knowledge of what was being done. This verdict is supported by the evidence.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/9481752. Public record. Not legal advice.