State v. Villanueva
| Decision Date | 26 October 2021 |
| Docket Number | DA 19-0675 |
| Parties | STATE of Montana, Plaintiff and Appellee, v. Jesus Chuey VILLANUEVA, Defendant and Appellant. |
| Court | Montana Supreme Court |
For Appellant: Nancy G. Schwartz, N.G. Schwartz Law, PLLC, Billings, Montana
For Appellee: Austin Knudsen, Montana Attorney General, C. Mark Fowler, Assistant Attorney General, Helena, Montana, Scott D. Twito, Yellowstone County Attorney, Billings, Montana
¶1 Appellant Jesus Villanueva (Villanueva) was convicted by a jury in the Thirteenth Judicial District Court, Yellowstone County, of two counts of sexual assault against his minor stepdaughters, A.L. and C.L.
On appeal, Villanueva alleges the District Court deprived him of his right to present a complete defense, and he requests the dismissal of his case or—alternatively—a new trial. Villanueva's appeal presents the following issues for review:
¶2 We affirm.
¶3 Villanueva lived in Billings, Montana with his wife, Autumn Villanueva (Autumn) and Autumn's four children—including Villanueva's twin stepdaughters, A.L. and C.L. Villanueva and Autumn were recovering methamphetamine addicts who met at a Narcotics Anonymous meeting. The couple married in April 2015. Towards the end of 2015, both Villanueva and Autumn relapsed. In February 2016, the Department of Public Health and Human Services, Child and Family Services Division (CFS), temporarily removed all four children from Villanueva and Autumn's care due to the couple's methamphetamine abuse. In June 2016, Heidi Kimmet (Kimmet)—a Child Protection Specialist (CPS) of eighteen years—was assigned to the family's case by CFS. The record reflects that, between June 2016 and February 2017, Kimmet conducted interviews with Autumn, A.L., C.L., and Villanueva in connection with the family's then-ongoing CFS case.
¶4 In September 2016, after Villanueva and Autumn had both commenced a court-mandated drug treatment program, CFS returned the children to Villanueva and Autumn's care in Billings. Following the children's return, Autumn remained sober, and she eventually graduated from drug treatment court. However, Villanueva relapsed in October 2016. On January 31, 2017, Villanueva was arrested for driving under the influence (DUI) and was incarcerated. Over the course of the next few days, Villanueva made several recorded phone calls to Autumn from jail. During one of these phone calls, Autumn accused Villanueva of cheating on her the night he was arrested, to which Villanueva admitted. During another phone call, Autumn informed Villanueva that both of her then-seven-year-old twin daughters, A.L. and C.L., had come forward and told her that Villanueva had sexually assaulted them in the past. However, Villanueva denied these sexual assault accusations over the phone and pleaded with Autumn not to go to the police.
¶5 A few days later, on February 6, 2017, while Villanueva was still in jail for his DUI charge, Autumn arranged for an in-person meeting with CPS Kimmet. During this meeting, Autumn disclosed that, earlier that week, her twin daughters, A.L. and C.L., told her that Villanueva had sexually assaulted each of them on multiple occasions. Thereafter, Kimmet filed a report with the Yellowstone County Sheriff's Office. On February 14, 2017, the Sheriff's Office conducted separate forensic interviews with A.L. and C.L., each of whom reiterated their allegations against Villanueva. On July 5, 2017, the State filed an Information charging Villanueva with two counts of sexual assault for acts allegedly committed against A.L. and C.L., in addition to one count of sexual intercourse without consent for acts allegedly committed against A.L. only.
¶6 On July 6, 2017, Villanueva filed a discovery motion requesting that the State produce all materials pursuant to §§ 46-15-323, 46-15-327, MCA —the relevant statutory disclosure requirements for the State in criminal cases—as well as all other exculpatory material known to the State, pursuant to Brady v. Maryland , 373 U.S. 83, 83 S. Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963). Discovery proceeded for over a year until November 20, 2018, when Kent Ewalt (Ewalt)—a private investigator hired by Villanueva—conducted an interview of CPS Kimmet in the presence of Villanueva's counsel. During this interview, Kimmet discussed the prior interviews she had conducted of A.L., C.L., Autumn, and Villanueva in connection with A.L. and C.L.’s CFS case. Each of Kimmet's CFS interviews with Villanueva's family members occurred after June 2016 but before February 2017—that is, before Kimmet was made aware of A.L. and C.L.’s sexual abuse allegations. As a result, Kimmet informed Ewalt and Villanueva's attorney that she had not questioned any family members about any potential sexual abuse allegations during these interviews. Kimmet also noted that she did not bring A.L. and C.L.’s CFS case file with her to the November 2018 interview with the defense. However, Kimmet disclosed that this case file included electronic notes from each of her interviews which she had entered into CFS's Child Adult Protection Systems (CAPS) database. Kimmet also stated that she had "possibly" kept her own handwritten notes from each of her interviews with these family members and that these handwritten notes might also be present in A.L. and C.L.’s CFS case file. At the end of the interview, Villanueva's counsel informed Kimmet of the defense's desire to obtain copies of her handwritten notes.
¶7 On December 3, 2018, Villanueva submitted a motion for the production of all CFS documents related to A.L. and C.L. for an in-camera review. This motion requested CFS's "complete file" on the two children and specifically requested the production of both the electronic CAPS notes and the handwritten notes that Kimmet had mentioned during her November 2018 interview with the defense. The District Court approved the motion and the State subsequently provided its case file to the court for an in-camera inspection. On January 28, 2019, the District Court disclosed approximately 200 pages from the CFS file to both Villanueva and the State. Although Kimmet's CAPS notes were included in this disclosure, Kimmet's handwritten notes were not.
¶8 On January 30, 2019, Kimmet was interviewed a second time by Villanueva's private investigator, Ewalt, again in the presence of Villanueva's attorney. During this second interview, Kimmet disclosed that, although she had been able to locate some of her handwritten notes from her CFS interview with Villanueva, her previously referenced handwritten notes from her interviews with Autumn, A.L., and C.L. likely no longer existed. Kimmet recalled that, due to the confidentiality concerns surrounding CFS case information, Kimmet's supervisor, Roxanne Roller (Roller), had instructed Kimmet to enter the information from all of her handwritten interview notes into the secure CAPS database and to shred her handwritten notes thereafter. Kimmet stated that Roller had issued this directive on November 13, 2018—one week before Kimmet's first interview with the defense—and that this directive applied to all of Kimmet's CFS cases. As a result, Kimmet informed Ewalt that she had previously spoken in error and had most likely shredded her handwritten notes after entering their content into CAPS, in compliance with her supervisor's request. Although Kimmet admitted that her CAPS reports are not always as detailed as her handwritten notes, she nevertheless stated her CAPS reports generally contain all "important" information from her handwritten notes. Furthermore, Kimmet reaffirmed that she did not discuss anything related to sexual abuse in her interviews with Autumn, A.L., and C.L. prior to February 2017, as CFS's investigation at this time was exclusively related to the child safety issues posed by Villanueva's and Autumn's drug use. Kimmet also asserted that, to the best of her knowledge, neither Autumn, nor A.L., nor C.L. had ever said anything during these interviews that would have caused Kimmet to suspect any sexual abuse of the children had occurred.
¶9 On February 26, 2019, Villanueva filed a motion to dismiss his criminal case on the grounds that, by failing to preserve and provide Villanueva with Kimmet's handwritten notes from her interviews with A.L., C.L., and Autumn, the State had violated Villanueva's due process right to "present a complete defense." Villanueva also filed a brief in support of this motion alleging the State had specifically violated his due process rights under Brady by failing to produce potentially exculpatory evidence. 373 U.S. at 87, 83 S. Ct. at 1196-97. Alternatively, Villanueva also argued that the State had "deliberately shredded" these exculpatory documents, constituting a due process violation due to the State's "failure to preserve evidence" under California v. Trombetta , 467 U.S. 479, 485-89, 104 S. Ct. 2528, 2532-34, 81 L.Ed.2d 413 (1984) (). Villanueva also asserted violations of §§ 46-15-322(1)(e) and 46-15-327, MCA.1 Overall, Villanueva's motion to dismiss asserted that Kimmet's handwritten notes from her CFS interviews with A.L., C.L., and Autumn would have revealed that A.L. and C.L. initially denied or were equivocal about whether Villanueva had ever sexually assaulted them.
¶10 On ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Mathis
...questions which implicate a criminal defendant's right to due process, is plenary. State v. Villanueva , 2021 MT 277, ¶ 23, 406 Mont. 149, 497 P.3d 586 (citations omitted). "Legislative enactments are presumed to be constitutional[,]" and "[t]he party challenging a statute has the burden of......
- State v. Corriher