USA vs. Yolanda Jean Madden

[Updated 12/24/09 -- scroll to bottom.]

The other day we learned about Barry Cooper and his sting operation in which he set up a fake marijuana grow house to tempt the Odessa Police Department to raid it. They took him up on it. The raw video from his cameras is now available.

When I first wrote about this in Odessa Cops Stung I omitted that part of Eddie Garcia's CBS7 report addressing Mr. Raymond Madden and his daughter, Ms. Yolanda Jean Madden. Yolanda Madden was arrested in 2005 in Odessa for possession of illegal drugs, intent to distribute, and doing all of that too close to a school. She was tried in the Federal Court in Midland, Texas, found guilty, and given a prison sentence.

Her dad, Mr. Madden, contends that the drugs which Ms. Madden was charged with possession of were actually planted in her car by the police, and Mr. Barry Cooper's efforts to embarrass the Odessa Police were apparently for the purpose of helping Mr. Madden in his efforts to help his daughter.

To try to get to the bottom of this one would start by looking at the court record at the Federal Court in Midland. It's cause number 7:05-CR-134, and it was tried before a Judge without a jury on October 11, 2005, and the Judge found her guilty.  It appears from this record that an informant, in cooperation with the Odessa Police Department, arranged to purchase some methamphetamine from her, they arranged to meet, and she was arrested at the scene.

She appealed the court's ruling to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 5th Circuit and lost. The 5th Circuit's March 22, 2007, ruling in case No. 06-50428 can be read online in PDF. In reaching the conclusion it did, the Court of Appeals reviewed some of the facts of the case, and since facts are all we are concerned with here, some of the highlights from that opinion, edited for brevity, will follow:

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff - Appellee
v.
YOLANDA JEAN MADDEN Defendant - Appellant

• After a bench trial, the district court found Yolanda Madden guilty of possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine within 1000 feet of a university, a junior high school, and a playground. She contends she did not validly waive her right to a jury trial, despite that she executed a waiver ... By executing the waiver, and absent a claim of prejudice, she is presumed validly to have waived her right to a jury trial.

• Madden contends that the warrantless search of her vehicle was not supported by probable cause because the informant who led police to her was not shown to be reliable. The informant identified Madden by name and by photograph, and he provided credible and detailed information about her, including her history of selling methamphetamine to him, where she lived, her father’s place of business,and what vehicles she drove. As police observed, the informant initiated two telephone conversations with Madden to arrange to buy methamphetamine from her. Police corroborated information about her vehicle, and the informant accurately predicted her arrival at the set location in the vehicle she was driving. Under the totality of the circumstances, the information given by the informant provided probable cause to stop and search Madden’s vehicle.

• Madden contends that her admission to police that there was methamphetamine in her vehicle should not have been admitted, because it was either the fruit of an illegal stop or obtained in violation of [her] Miranda [rights]. Because the information provided by the informant established probable cause or at least reasonable suspicion for the stop, Madden’s admission was not the fruit of an illegal stop.

• Madden’s statement was not obtained in violation of Miranda. Police had only just stopped her at the meeting site, and a detective had explained that police were conducting a drug investigation and had reason to believe she possessed methamphetamine, when she blurted out that there was methamphetamine in a bag inside her vehicle. She was not in custody. ...

• In addition, Madden was not being interrogated. Nothing in the record suggests that the officers expected her to blurt out that she was carrying illegal drugs before being arrested, Mirandized, or questioned further. ...

• Madden contends that the district court should have departed downward to cancel out her two-level sentence increase based on the crime’s proximity to two schools and a playground. She argues that police entrapped her into appearing at that location. ...

• This was not a reverse sting, because the government was not acting as the seller. Moreover, the evidence shows no sentence entrapment, but rather that the site for the meeting was chosen by Madden and the informant, without police input, because it was convenient for Madden.

• The judgment is AFFIRMED.

A petition for a writ of certiorari was submitted to the U.S. Supreme Court, but it was denied.

Finally, in August of 2008 Ms. Madden filed a writ of habeas corpus alleging that, among other things, the government used false evidence and she had ineffective assistance of counsel. That writ is still pending.

Updated 12/24/09 -- see Yolanda Madden awarded a new trial

Comments

[Les]

Thanks, George. I appreciate the opportunity to read some facts of the case without having to exert the effort to get it myself.

It's sad how quickly people form opinions with what they read on the Internet or hear on the news. But I guess it's just human nature to be gullible and to avoid effort.

Although I should now go see for myself the original documents you cited, I think I'll just have go get a beer out of the fridge and play a little computer solitare. Am I American or what?

[Geo]

Les, to present Ms. Madden's side of the story would necessitate publishing all or portions of her very long writ of habeas corpus. That and all the other documents filed in this case are available online through Pacer for a fee, and maybe her dad will do that for her.

Oh, one more thing. Try spider solitaire.

[Leatherneck]

Just a few facts.
The informant admitted to planting drugs at officers insistance. He passed poly graph.
Perjury did occur at the trial. Fed Prosc Jackson told court he would investigate perjury. He failed to do so. All defense witnesses took poly graphs waiting for jackson to keep promise and investigate. Jackson did not persue investigation. Why? Did he know it was the police that lied, they had previuosly lied to him about existance of video.
Fed prosc. Conspired with OPD to deny 5th amendment rights. Officer testified that fed prosc instructed OPD not to record interviews or confessions - just have to cops show up in Junells court and testify as to the "confession".Judge stated he did not hear that and officer changed story. However internal OPD documents show that in fact that was the case.
two officers in fact did testify to a "confession". Trouble is that interview NEVER took place. New evidence has surfaced that proves officersdid not interview Madden. Altered ECDC and OPD records show an attempt to cover story.One officer would have had to be in two places at the same time. OPDnarcs basica work for Fed Prosc. OPD chief of police stated it"s good to have feds because you don't need the evidence to get confiction as you would in state court.
Judge denied continuance and Madden was coerced into "bench trial. Her lawyer Chauvez was "good friends with arresting officer Travland. We now have IA tapes where Travland states Chauvez talked with him and said he would plead Madden guilty.Defense has strong reason to believe that after being fired Chauvez gave critcal defense info to OPD. There elaborate tale of two vehicles will confirm. Chauvez never made any motions, ask for fingerprints, or follow up on discovered police corruption. After being fired he filed motion for continuance which he said junell told him to do. It was denied by the time madden showed up in court with lawyers from Houston. No Midland lawyer would take case because they said they could not win in Junells court.
Any look at transcript will see that judges"findings of fact" do not reflect testimony. He found officers credible that testified to physically impossible events. He found informant credible as to police info on search but not credible when he testified to planting drugs. Same person same day - credible for prosecution / not credible for defense. The poly graph was administered by one of the most credible men in the field "Swartz" . Fed judges and prosecutors have absolutely to much power. Jackson used the power of the gov. to do very petty acts. In Magistrates court he admitted to "ex-parte" conversations with the court. A complete review of this case will show all that is broke with the system. So much more but will stop until madden gets her day in court with a jury of her peers. The judge and prosecutor do not want this to happen. Junell prides himself with :clearing the docket. At what cost. Bet he was glad his son got several continuances. Politicians should never be judges. 99.9% pure govment judge. Never deliberated before any decision in this case.Thank God Obama can fire Fed Prosc. pettitions are being filed . Truth has a neat habit of revealing itself. Liars just don't have good enough memories. With national publicity Madden will finally see the truth revealed. Nobody has anything to fear from Madden only thing evil men have to fear is the truth. It's out of midland / Odessa scope to contain. With national exposure and new admin maybe FBI will investigate. Advise no one to lie to them.

[Leatherneck]

Just one more little fact - police video shows that Madden did not blurt out any thing like the officers lied about. In fact she refused them permission to search the vehicle. Officer travland testified at trial that the officers reported to him that she refused the search. Video very revealing to lies of police. It shows no drugs ever shown to anyone and that Nayola absolutely did not find drugs in driver side door as he reported. Video was on that door at all times. Nayola did not find drugs. he added them after the fact. OPD review by Deputy Chief and Captain of narcs confired. Deputy Chief has stated that he believe narcs planted drugs on wrong person but after it was done it could not be undone. Defense now has proof that the bust was done as a favor to Joe Commander as retaliation.

[Leatherneck]

The officers stated site was "convient for madden" because she had Midland cty address. Again their lie will be revealed as madden actually lived in Midland cty but south of Odessa not east as they believed. The meeting was set up under false pretenses as the informant told Madden he had money that he and his girlfriend had borrowed a few days before. (remember he passed polygraph) After meeting at his apartment (where drugs were planted)policed followed her to Albertson where they pulled her over. There are just to many contradictions to police stories. When you are denied time to investigate for defense it's bad enough however there is never enough time to prepare if police are willing to"testiLIE" their words not mine.
This group will be exposed just as the Tulia bad guys were. You can not have badcops without bad prosecutors and bad or blind judges.

[Geo]

Leatherneck,

Ms. Madden filed a long writ of habeas corpus containing multiple exhibits. I presume that the writ lays out all of the defenses and that the exhibits point to the evidence. You should consider starting a website or blog and obtaining and posting that writ so that we may read it and make up our own minds.

[Belinda]

I agree with George. We need to make up our own minds after reading the facts. The bottom line is Ms. Madden had the drugs with intent to distribute and admitted this to police willingly. If she did not intend to sell them she would not be knowingly be possession of them. I have a feeling the editorial in the Midland paper a couple weeks ago about Ms. Madden and her situation as well as the above posts ere submitted by her father.

If one would look into Ms. Madden's past, this is not her first experience with the court system. There is more that meets the eye here.

[Geo]

Thanks, Belinda.

[FREEYOLANDA]

What meets the eye is the fact of the proof of OPD officers planting drugs on Ms. Madden.
Seems everyone does not want to hear or see the proof. Truth will prevail.

http://www.iowastatedaily.com/articles/1999/09/30/import/19990930-archive22.txt

Federal Judge Junells son served
3 months and paid a $300 fine.
How many favors did he call in on this one.

[Geo]

Freeyolanda, I'm sure everyone would like to hear or see the proof. Where is it? I'm not being cute, we would all like to see it if it exists.

As for the article you linked, how do we know that's Judge Junell's son?

[FREEYOLANDA]

Dougspeak at Odessa American has a copy of court transcripts.
Or you can go to 1801 East Pearl St. in Odessa to see the proof. Mr. Madden has posted his address and also has offered to show the proof.
As for proof of the article it is called a FOAI.Before I post I do my homework.
I do look forward to your site correcting statements that you have made of Ms. Madden.
Truth will Prevail.

[Geo]

Freeyolanda, please leave a link to the site where we can see your evidence.

[WeaselSpleen]

"If one would look into Ms. Madden's past, this is not her first experience with the court system."

Nice use of loaded words. "experience with the court system." That could mean anything from being convicted of armed robbery to obtaining a marriage license.

I've got "experience with the court system" too, since I've served on juries.

But that's beside the point. Even if she was convicted of a crime, something you hint at but don't actually state outright, that STILL would not justify violation of 4th amendment rights.

"Freeyolanda, please leave a link to the site where we can see your evidence."

Wait, so you're not willing to look at any evidence unless it is posted on a web site?

It's just too inconvenient to separate ass from chair and physically move to another location where something might be? If I can't call it up on my personal computer screen, it's just not worth pursuing? Really?

"If she did not intend to sell them she would not be knowingly be possession of them."

This statement makes no sense. It seems like you may be trying to state that possession automatically proves intent to sell?

I possess all sorts of items that I have no intention of selling. Like my house key, and the groceries in back of my car, and the fillings in my teeth.

[FREEYOLANDA]

“As the history of virtually every police agency attests, policing is an occupation that is rife with opportunities for misconduct….The difficulties of controlling corruption can be traced to several factors: the reluctance of police officers to report….activities by their fellow officers (known as ‘The Code’, ‘The Code of Silence’ or “The Blue Code’), the reluctance of police administrators to acknowledge the existence of corruption in their agencies…”

STANDING ON THE TRUTH

[John L]

http://www.nevergetbusted.com/kopbusters/yolanda_evidence.php

[FreeYolanda]

Thanks John L for the post.

[FreeYolanda]

Truth will prevail. The United States Justice Department will now investigate the case of Ms. Madden.

Standing on the Truth.

[FreeYolanda]

Judge: Chavez can pursue law license again

Article in Odessa American newspaper.

Also addressed during Thursday's hearing were several other legal charges Chavez has faced since he was released from prison, all of which were dropped.

In 2004 and again in 2008, Chavez was arrested on DWI charges, the latter one being a felony due to a person under the age of 15 being in the car.

Both charges were dropped, however, during preliminary Department of Public Safety hearings when it was ruled that there had not been enough probable cause for police to pull Chavez over.

In both cases, he said he was "nowhere near" exceeding the legal blood-alcohol limit.

Additionally in the past eight years, accusations of fraud and property tax violations involving Chavez have surfaced, only to all later be dropped or resolved.

Just how far does corruption go in Odessa?

[Steffi]

There's nothing like the relief of fniding what you're looking for.