The Supreme Court upholds the conviction of woman who challenged expert testimony in a drug case

WASHINGTON — WASHINGTON (AP) — The Supreme Court Thursday upheld the conviction of a California woman who said she knew nothing about a stash of methamphetamine hidden in her car.

The 6-3 opinion came in a case that revolved around how much expert witnesses can say about a suspect’s mentality.

Delilah Guadalupe Diaz was sentenced to seven years in prison on drug charges after Border Patrol agents discovered methamphetamine worth nearly $370,000 hidden in the car’s door panel as she crossed the U.S.-Mexico border.

Diaz claimed the car belonged to a friend and she did not know the drugs were in it. Defense attorneys argued that she was a “blind mule,” a term for people used by cartels to smuggle drugs without their knowledge.

Prosecutors disagreed. They called as an expert witness a Homeland Security agent who testified that drug cartels typically do not send large quantities of drugs to people who are unaware of the contraband, although the agent acknowledged that this has happened.

Diaz appealed her conviction, arguing that the officer’s testimony violated the evidentiary rule that expert witnesses cannot provide an opinion about a suspect’s mental state.

Prosecutors countered that the officer was speaking from his own expertise and that his testimony did not violate this rule because it did not contain specific references to Diaz.

Lower courts were divided on that distinction. Judges in some parts of the country have allowed more general expert testimony about mental status, while others have disregarded it, her lawyers argued.

The case is Diaz v. United States, 23-14

___

Follow the AP’s coverage of the U.S. Supreme Court https://apnews.com/hub/us-supreme-court.