Page 29 - TPA Journal January February 2023

legally insufficient to show that he put the mari- and sold the drugs to the officer. Police obtained
juana in the toilet and to prove that putting the search warrants for both rooms with plans to exe-
marijuana into the toilet with water and human cute the search warrants the following day.
waste altered, concealed, or destroyed it. The
court of appeals found the evidence legally insuf- The following day, June 9, 2016, police surveilled
ficient and rendered an acquittal. We granted the motel before executing the search warrants,
review to decide whether the evidence is sufficient and they saw that the drug activity had shifted to
to show that Appellant altered or destroyed the Room 18. Lt. Nava (then Special Agent Nava),
marijuana. Because we conclude that the evidence who oversaw the operation, testified that he saw
is legally sufficient to show that Appellant altered many brief, hand-to-hand transactions, which in
the marijuana, we will reverse the judgment of the his experience, “tend to be quick street level deals
court of appeals and remand the cause for it to that are happening for narcotics.” In particular, he
address Appellant’s remaining issues. saw a female leave Room 18 numerous times on
foot to conduct hand-to-hand transactions with
1 Section 37.09(a) states, as relevant to other people who approached on foot. Another
this offense, that, agent saw a male leave Room 18, walk across the
(a) A person commits an offense if, street (where the agent was parked), produce a
knowing that an investigation or official glass pipe, and begin smoking a “white rock-like
proceeding is pending or in progress, he: substance.” Because the drug activity had moved
(1) alters, destroys, or conceals any to Room 18, Lt. Nava decided that the agents
record, document, or thing with intent to needed to regroup. They assigned a team of offi-
impair its verity, legibility, or availability cers to execute the search warrant at Room 15 and
as evidence in the investigation or offi- for a team of officers to do a “knock and talk” at
cial proceeding; . . . Room 18.2 Police did not execute the search war-
rant for Room 12 at that time because they had
In June 2016, Special Agent Gabriel Nava, a mem- insufficient personnel. Police then arrived in force,
ber of the gang/organized crime unit of the some in a marked car wearing gear identifying
Criminal Investigations Division of the Texas themselves as state police. As they were arriving,
Department of Public Safety, was coordinating a woman approaching Room 18 saw them. She
surveillance at the Studio and Rooms motel com- went to the open doorway of Room 18 and yelled
plex in El Paso because he believed that drugs something to the occupants, but Lt. Nava could
were being sold there. The motel was associated not hear what she said. The woman then stepped
with drug dealing, mostly crack cocaine and away from the door and sat on the curb. As police
methamphetamine, as well as human trafficking approached the motel rooms announcing their
by gang members. There had also been multiple presence and ordering the occupants to show
assaults related to the illegal activities and a stab- themselves, someone inside Room 18 slammed
bing not long before this incident. that door shut. When Lt. Nava reached the door,
he smelled the strong odor of marijuana and could
The day before the raid, June 8, 2016, a criminal hear “a bunch of movements.” According to him,
informant told police that drugs were being sold in it was “obviously more than one person — quick
Room 15, so police set up a controlled buy. The movement.” He told other agents behind him to
undercover officer went to Room 12, and a female keep knocking and try to contact the occupants
answered the door. The female then went to Room while he proceeded to Room 15, his assignment,
15, obtained crack cocaine, returned to Room 12, to execute the no-knock search warrant. While Lt.

Jan. - Feb. 2023 www.texaspoliceassociation.com • (512) 458-3140 25