United States v. Chujoy, Criminal Action No.: 5:15-cr-00029

• Decision Date: 13 September 2016
• Docket Number: Criminal Action No.: 5:15-cr-00029
• Citation: 207 F.Supp.3d 626
• Parties: UNITED STATES of America, v. Felix Adriano CHUJOY, et al., Defendants.
• Court: U.S. District Court — Western District of Virginia

207 F.Supp.3d 626

UNITED STATES of America,

v.Felix Adriano CHUJOY, et al., Defendants.

Criminal Action No.: 5:15-cr-00029

United States District Court, W.D. Virginia, Harrisonburg Division .

Signed September 13, 2016

Filed September 14, 2016

Heather L. Carlton, United States Attorneys Office, Charlottesville, VA, for United States of America.

MEMORANDUM OPINION

Michael F. Urbanski, United States District Judge

On December 22, 2015, a jury found defendants Felix Adriano Chujoy and Carolyn J. Edlind guilty of conspiracy to engage in witness tampering under 18 U.S.C. § 1512(k) (Count One), witness tampering under 18 U.S.C. § 1512(b)(1) (Count Two), and obstruction of justice under 18 U.S.C. § 1503 (Count Three). The jury also found Edlind guilty of perjury under 18 U.S.C. § 1623 (Count Four), and a second count of obstruction (Count Five). The final two counts concern Edlind's testimony before the grand jury on October 6, 2015.

Before the court is defendants' joint motion for acquittal, ECF No. 113.¹ Edlind and Chujoy argue insufficiency of the evidence and claim no reasonable juror could convict on any count. They also claim plain error in the court's jury instructions. The government disagrees and urges the court to affirm the guilty verdicts.

After careful review of the trial record and the arguments of counsel, the court concludes that the government submitted sufficient evidence for a reasonable juror to find Edlind and Chujoy guilty of conspiracy, witness tampering, and obstruction as charged in Counts One, Two and Three. However, the court does not find that any of the six alleged false statements in Count Four support Edlind's perjury conviction. The court likewise finds the evidence insufficient to convict Edlind of obstruction as charged in Count Five. Accordingly, the joint motion for acquittal, ECF No. 113, is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part . The defendants' convictions on Counts One, Two, and Three are affirmed. Edlind's convictions on Counts Four and Five are vacated, and a judgment of acquittal will be entered on these counts.

I.

The current indictment relates to another criminal case pending before this court: United States v. Maria Rosalba Alvarado McTague, et al. , No. 5:14–CR–055 (filed Dec. 4, 2014) [hereinafter the "Inca's Secret case"]. The government alleges that Chujoy and Edlind contacted Michael Kwiatkowski, a witness in the Inca's Secret case, between March 2015 and June 2015 in an attempt to influence his testimony during trial. The government further alleges that Edlind lied about her communications with Chujoy and Kwiatkowski when she was questioned before the grand jury. The relevant facts are outlined below.

A. Investigation of Inca's Secret Restaurant

On or about July 2014, the Department of Homeland Security began investigating the legal status of workers at the Inca's Secret Restaurant in Harrisonburg, Virginia. Trial Tr., Dec. 16, 2015, ECF No. 109, 4:16-6:22 ("12/16 Trial Tr."). Chujoy and his mother Maria Rosalba Alvarado McTague ("Alvarado") were targets of that investigation. Id. In December 2014, Chujoy and Alvarado were indicted on various federal charges, arrested, and released on bond. Id. at 27:8-29:23; 36:21-37:4.² As a condition of bond, Chujoy and Alvarado were to avoid all contact with potential witnesses in the Inca's Secret case. Id. at 36:8-38:13; Gov't Exs. 3, 4. Notably, Alvarado was released into the third-party custody of Edlind and her husband, Gary Edlind. 12/16 Trial Tr. 37:23-38:13. The Edlinds were close friends with Chujoy, and Carolyn Edlind was often described as Chujoy's "tia" or "aunt." See, e.g. , Trial Tr., Dec. 18, 2015, ECF No. 111, 74:3-4 ("12/18 Trial Tr.").³

In early 2015, the government discovered evidence that Chujoy, Alvarado, and Chujoy's sister, Gladys Chujoy, were contacting witnesses in the Inca's Secret case. 12/16 Trial Tr. 8:18-23; 40:4-23. Agent Tami Ketcham of the Department of Homeland Security obtained cell phone records for these witnesses, and discovered they received multiple calls from phones associated with Alvarado, Gladys Chujoy, and several known associates of Chujoy. Id. at 9:2-25:25; Gov't Exs. 6-11; 13-25. No calls were discovered from Chujoy's personal phone. However, federal agents interviewed Chujoy's known associates—including Edlind and Kwiatkowski—and learned that Chujoy had made calls from their phones on various occasions. 12/16 Trial Tr. 64:7-68:18; Trial Tr., Dec. 17, 2015, ECF No. 110, 113:3-114:10; 177:21-23; 206:9-12 ("12/17 Trial Tr."); 12/18 Trial Tr. 42:12-43:13; 75:12-76:15.

Acting on evidence that Chujoy, Alvarado, and Gladys Chujoy had contacted potential witnesses, the grand jury returned a superseding indictment in the Inca's Secret case in March 2015. 12/16 Trial Tr. 40:24-41:20.⁴ This superseding indictment alleged charges of obstruction and witness tampering against all three defendants. Id. Chujoy was re-arrested on March 18, 2015, at Edlind's residence in Harrisonburg, Virginia. Id. at 52:9-53:15. The court thereafter detained Chujoy at the Rockingham County Regional Jail. Id. at 42:10-12. Trial on the superseding indictment in the Inca's Secret case was set for June 22, 2015. Id. at 42:16-20.

B. Witness Tampering of Kwiatkowski

After his re-arrest in March 2015, Chujoy continued to contact friends and family from prison. In particular, Chujoy made multiple attempts to speak with Kwiatkowski or have others, including Edlind, speak with Kwiatkowski on his behalf. Kwiatkowski had a "close" friendship with Chujoy for at least six years, which intensified after Kwiatkowski returned to Harrisonburg in 2013.12/18 Trial Tr. 72:1-73:8. The two men socialized with several mutual friends, including Edlind. Id. at 72:1-74:7. This friendship made Kwiatkowski a potential witness in the Inca's Secret case. For example, Chujoy told Kwiatkowski that employees at the Inca's Secret Restaurant were undocumented aliens. Id. at 77:21-78:21.⁵ Further, Kwiatkowski's cell phone was used to contact other witnesses in the Inca's Secret case, and Kwiatkowski could testify that Chujoy borrowed his phone on several occasions. Id. at 75:12-76:14.

As part of her investigation in the Inca's Secret case, Agent Ketcham interviewed Kwiatkowski in May 2015. 12/16 Trial Tr. 67:9-13. Kwiatkowski provided a witness statement that was disclosed to Chujoy's defense counsel. Id. He was also subpoenaed to testify during trial of the Inca's Secret case. 12/16 Trial Tr. 26:22-27:3.

1. "Taco Tuesday" Dinners

The first relevant contact between Chujoy, Kwiatkowski, and Edlind came in late 2014. After Chujoy's first arrest in the Inca's Secret case, he attended several dinners with Edlind, her husband Gary Edlind, Kwiatkowski, and a friend named Christina Kang. The majority of these dinners took place on "Taco Tuesdays" at the El Charro Restaurant in Harrisonburg. 12/17 Trial Tr. 179:9-180:14; 12/18 Trial Tr. 82:11-83:14. During this period—which stretched from December 2014 to March 2015—Kwiatkowski, Edlind, and Kang were some of Chujoy's closest friends and provided him with "emotional support." 12/18 Trial Tr. 116:22-118:5.

After Chujoy was re-arrested on March 18, 2015, Edlind continued to organize "Taco Tuesdays" dinners with Kwiatkowski, Kang, and her husband to discuss Chujoy and his legal situation. Notably, Edlind asked Kang and Kwiatkowski to turn their cell phones off or leave them in the car during these dinners because Edlind believed the "government" could listen to their conversations. 12/17 Trial Tr. 184:2-6. Kang testified that this request made her feel "very uncomfortable" and like she "had to hide something." Id. at 184:2-11.

The dinners with Edlind, Kwiatkowski, and Kang were sporadic, and occurred approximately once every two or three weeks from late March 2015 until June 2015. 12/17 Trial Tr. 180:7-185:21; 12/18 Trial Tr. 82:11-84:4; 87:16-88:20. During these meetings, Edlind, Kwiatkowski, and Kang discussed their "reactions" to Chujoy's ongoing prosecution, 12/17 Trial Tr. 183:11-22, and Edlind offered updates on Chujoy's condition in prison. 12/18 Trial Tr. 81:20-82:7. Edlind also asked Kwiatkowski to visit Chujoy at the Rockingham County Regional Jail. Id. At one dinner, Edlind and her husband asked Kwiatkowski about his interviews with federal agents. Id. at 94:3-12. Kwiatkowski "brush [ed] off" these questions because he "didn't want to tell them that [he had spoken with law enforcement] because then [he] figured they'd ask [him] ... what [he] said or something like that." Id.

2. Dinner at Edlind's Home in March 2015

In addition to the Taco Tuesday dinners, Edlind hosted at least one dinner for Kwiatkowski and Kang at her home in Harrisonburg. This dinner occurred on or about March 25, 2015, only a few weeks after Chujoy was re-arrested on the superseding indictment in the Inca's Secret case. 12/17 Trial Tr. 180:15-182:9; 12/18 Trial Tr. 84:5-85:1.⁶ At this time, Edlind was "obsessing" about Chujoy's case and was worried about the charges pending against him. 12/18 Trial Tr. 128:11-25. During the dinner, Edlind "bash[ed]" Chujoy and disclosed things about him that Kwiatkowski and Kang had not known. Id. at 85:9-21. Further, Edlind and her husband told Kwiatkowski and Kang that if federal agents tried to contact them, they should say that they "d[id]n't know anything because [they] d[id]n't know anything." Id. Kwiatkowski was "kind of shocked" by this statement and found it "strange." Id. at 85:24-86:22. As Kwiatkowski explained at trial:

I felt [the dinner] was really strange ... and I didn't understand it because I thought it was just going to be a meal about, like, reminiscing [about Chujoy], not finding out stuff that we didn't know about him and then the last part where they were, like, you don't—just say you don't know anything.

Id. at 87:10-15. However, Kwiatkowski admitted that, at the time, he did not believe he knew anything relevant to the Inca's Secret case, did not feel threatened or intimidated by the Edlinds, did...