United States v. Deleon

Decision Date19 November 2019
Docket NumberNo. CR 15-4268 JB,CR 15-4268 JB
Citation426 F.Supp.3d 1034
Parties UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. Angel DELEON, Joe Lawrence Gallegos, Edward Troup, a.k.a. "Huero Troup," Leonard Lujan, Billy Garcia, a.k.a. "Wild Bill," Eugene Martinez, a.k.a. "Little Guero," Allen Patterson, Christopher Chavez, a.k.a. "Critter," Javier Alonso, a.k.a. "Wineo," Arturo Arnulfo Garcia, a.k.a. "Shotgun," Benjamin Clark, a.k.a. "Cyclone," Ruben Hernandez; Jerry ArmentA, a.k.a. "Creeper," Jerry Montoya, a.k.a. "Boxer," Mario Rodriguez, a.k.a. "Blue," Timothy Martinez, a.k.a. "Red," Mauricio Varela, a.k.a. "Archie," a.k.a. "Hog Nuts," Daniel Sanchez, a.k.a. "Dan Dan," Gerald Archuleta, a.k.a. "Styx," a.k.a. "Grandma," Conrad Villegas, a.k.a. "Chitmon," Anthony Ray Baca, a.k.a. "Pup," Robert Martinez, a.k.a. "Baby Rob," Roy Paul Martinez, a.k.a. "Shadow," Christopher Garcia, Carlos Herrera, a.k.a. "Lazy," Rudy Perez, a.k.a. "Ru Dog," Andrew Gallegos, a.k.a. "Smiley," Santos Gonzalez; Paul Rivera, Shauna Gutierrez, and Brandy Rodriguez, Defendants.
CourtU.S. District Court — District of New Mexico

Fred Federici, Attorney for the United States, Acting Under Authority Conferred by 28 U.S.C. § 515, Albuquerque, New Mexico and Maria Ysabel Armijo, Randy M. Castellano, Matthew Beck, Assistant United States Attorneys, United States Attorney's Office, Las Cruces, New Mexico, Attorneys for the Plaintiff.

Susan M. Porter, Albuquerque, New Mexico and Sarah M. Gorman, Albuquerque, New Mexico, Attorneys for Defendant Angel DeLeon.

Richard Sindel, Sindel, Sindel & Noble, P.C., Clayton, Missouri and Brock Benjamin, Benjamin Law Firm, El Paso, Texas, Attorneys for Defendant Joe Lawrence Gallegos.

Patrick J. Burke, Patrick J. Burke, P.C., Denver, Colorado and Cori Ann Harbour-Valdez, The Harbour Law Firm, P.C., El Paso, Texas, Attorneys for Defendant Edward Troup.

Russell Dean Clark, Las Cruces, New Mexico, Attorney for Defendant Leonard Lujan.

James A. Castle, Castle & Castle, P.C., Denver, Colorado and Robert R. Cooper, Albuquerque, New Mexico, Attorneys for Defendant Billy Garcia.

Douglas E. Couleur, Douglas E. Couleur, P.A., Santa Fe, New Mexico, Attorney for Defendant Eugene Martinez.

Joseph E. Shattuck, Marco & Shattuck Law Firm, Albuquerque, New Mexico and Jeffrey C. Lahann, Las Cruces, New Mexico, Attorneys for Defendant Allen Patterson.

Eduardo Solis, El Paso, Texas and John L. Granberg, Granberg Law Office, El Paso, Texas and Orlando Mondragon, El Paso, Texas, Attorneys for Defendant Christopher Chavez.

Nathan D. Chambers, Nathan D. Chambers, Attorney at Law, Denver, Colorado and Noel Orquiz, Deming, New Mexico, Attorneys for Defendant Javier Alonso.

Laura E. Udall, Cooper & Udall Law Offices, Tucson, Arizona and Scott Moran Davidson, Albuquerque, New Mexico and Billy R. Blackburn, Albuquerque, New Mexico, Attorneys for Defendant Arturo Arnulfo Garcia.

Stephen E. Hosford, Stephen E. Hosford, P.C., Arrey, New Mexico and Jerry Daniel Herrera, Albuquerque, New Mexico, Attorneys for Defendant Benjamin Clark.

Pedro Pineda, Las Cruces, New Mexico and León Encinias, León Felipe Encinias, Attorney at Law, Albuquerque, New Mexico, Attorneys for Defendant Ruben Hernandez.

Gary Mitchell, Mitchell Law Office, Ruidoso, New Mexico, Attorney for Defendant Jerry Armenta.

Larry A. Hammond, Osborn Maledon, P.A., Phoenix, Arizona and Margaret Strickland, McGraw & Strickland, Las Cruces, New Mexico, Attorneys for Defendant Jerry Montoya.

Steven M. Potolsky, Jacksonville Beach, Florida and Santiago D. Hernandez, Law Office of Santiago D. Hernandez, El Paso, Texas, Attorneys for Defendant Mario Rodriguez.

Steven Lorenzo Almanza, Las Cruces, New Mexico and Ray Velarde, El Paso, Texas, Attorneys for Defendant Timothy Martinez.

Joe Spencer, El Paso, Texas and Mary Stillinger, El Paso, Texas, Attorneys for Defendant Mauricio Varela.

Lauren Noriega, The Noriega Law Firm, Los Angeles, California and Richard Jewkes, El Paso, Texas and Amy E. Jacks, Law Office of Amy E. Jacks, Los Angeles, California, Attorneys for Defendant Daniel Sanchez.

George A. Harrison, Las Cruces, New Mexico and Kimberly S. Bruselas-Benavidez, Albuquerque, New Mexico, Attorneys for Defendant Gerald Archuleta.

B.J. Crow, Crow Law Firm, Roswell, New Mexico, Attorney for Defendant Conrad Villegas.

Theresa M. Duncan, Duncan Earnest LLC, Albuquerque, New Mexico and Marc M. Lowry, Rothstein Donatelli LLP, Albuquerque, New Mexico, Attorneys for Defendant Anthony Ray Baca.

Charles J. McElhinney, CJM Law Firm, Las Cruces, New Mexico, Attorney for Defendant Robert Martinez.

Marcia J. Milner, Las Cruces, New Mexico, Attorney for Defendant Roy Paul Martinez.

Christopher W. Adams, Charleston, South Carolina and Amy Sirignano, Law Office of Amy Sirignano, P.C., Albuquerque, New Mexico, Attorneys for Defendant Christopher Garcia.

William R. Maynard, El Paso, Texas and Carey Corlew Bhalla, Law Office of Carey C. Bhalla, LLC, Albuquerque, New Mexico, Attorneys for Defendant Carlos Herrera.

Justine Fox-Young, Albuquerque, New Mexico and Ryan J. Villa, Law Office of Ryan J. Villa, Albuquerque, New Mexico, Attorneys for Defendant Rudy Perez.

Donavon A. Roberts, Albuquerque, New Mexico and Lisa Torraco, Albuquerque, New Mexico, Attorneys for Defendant Andrew Gallegos.

Erlinda O. Johnson, Law Office of Erlinda Ocampo Johnson, Albuquerque, New Mexico, Attorney for Defendant Santos Gonzalez.

Keith R. Romero, Keith R. Romero, Attorney and Counselor at Law, Albuquerque, New Mexico, Attorney for Paul Rivera.

Angela Arellanes, Albuquerque, New Mexico, Attorney for Defendant Shauna Gutierrez.

Jerry A. Walz, Alfred D. Creecy, Samuel Winder, Walz and Associates, Albuquerque, New Mexico, Attorneys for Defendant Brandy Rodriguez.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

James O. Browning, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE THIS MATTER comes before the Court on Defendants Christopher Garcia, Edward Troup, Joe Gallegos, Arturo Arnulfo Garcia, Andrew Gallegos, Chris Chavez, Mario Rodriguez, Rudy Perez, Carlos Herrera, Anthony Ray Baca, Daniel Sanchez, and Mauricio Varela's Sealed Opposed Motion to Compel Disclosure of Discoverable Materials Pursuant to Rule 16, filed September 22, 2017 (Doc. 1270)("Motion"). The Court held a hearing on November 9, 2017. The primary issue is whether the Court should compel Plaintiff United States of America to produce the following evidence requested by the Defendants: (i) all documents and records supporting DNA results obtained in the case, including bench notes and Federal Bureau of Investigation ("FBI") procedures and policies pertaining to DNA testing; (ii) all documentation related to Syndicato de Nuevo Mexico ("SNM") members charged in separate cases; (iii) all call records, texts, memoranda, 302s,1 recordings, debrief notes, and documents pertaining to financial payments or benefits relating to Eric Duran, Grace Duran No. 1, Grace Duran No. 2, Felicia Cordova, and Caroline Buena; (iv) all law enforcement cooperation agreements regarding any individual providing information to any law enforcement agency in the investigation; (v) documents pertaining to the United States' witness Mario Montoya's criminal history record and the benefits Montoya received for his cooperation with law enforcement; (vi) subpoenas served upon all sources of investigative information; and (vii) law enforcement agents' notes from debriefs of all defendants and confidential human sources in the case. The Court grants the Motion in part and denies it in part. The Court concludes that: (i) Plaintiff United States of America must produce bench notes describing the observations of technicians conducting DNA analysis, but does not need to produce DNA testing procedures and protocols; (ii) the United States does not need to produce documentation related to SNM members charged in separate cases; (iii) the United States must produce all requested documentation pertaining to the United States' witness Eric Duran for which disclosure is required by Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963) (" Brady"), and Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150, 92 S.Ct. 763, 31 L.Ed.2d 104 (1972) (" Giglio"); (iv) the United States must produce all law enforcement cooperation agreements within the United States' possession and relating to the individuals listed in paragraph 5.f of the Motion; (v) the United States must produce all documentation pertaining to the United States' witness Montoya's criminal history record and the benefits Montoya received for his cooperation with law enforcement to the extent that such documentation exists; (vi) the United States must produce all unsealed subpoenas served upon all sources of investigative information; and (vii) the United States must produce all law enforcement agents' notes from debriefs for which Brady and Giglio require disclosure, and the United States must preserve all other documents pertaining to agents' notes as required by the Jencks Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3500. In addition, the United States and Christopher Garcia must meet and confer to come to a mutual agreement about C. Garcia's remaining discovery requests.

FACTUAL BACKGROUND

The Court takes its background facts from the Second Superseding Indictment, filed March 9, 2017 (Doc. 947)("Indictment"). The background facts are largely unchanged from those facts that the Court provided in its Memorandum Opinion and Order, 323 F.R.D. 672, filed December 18, 2017 (Doc. 1585). The Court does not set forth these facts as findings or the truth. The Court recognizes that the factual background largely reflects the United States' version of events.

This case deals with crimes that SNM allegedly committed through its members. See Indictment at 2. SNM, through its members, operated in the District of New Mexico at all relevant times, and its members engaged in acts of violence and other criminal activities, "including murder, kidnapping, attempted murder, conspiracy to manufacture/distribute narcotics, and firearms trafficking." Indictment at 2. SNM constitutes an enterprise "as...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • United States v. Flynn
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Utah
    • December 13, 2021
    ...947 F.2d 854, 864 (8th Cir. 1991) (quoting United States v. Beaver, 524 F.2d 963, 966 (5th Cir. 1975)). [18] United States v. DeLeon, 426 F.Supp.3d 1034, 1054 (D.N.M. 2019). [19] United States v. Martin, 18 F.3d 1515, 1517 (10th Cir. 1994). [20] Id. at 1518 (quotations and citations omitted......
  • United States v. Edwards
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Kansas
    • July 6, 2020
    ...simply because he does not discover all potentially relevant evidence until after his suppression hearing."); United States v. DeLeon, 426 F.Supp.3d 1034, 1061 (D.N.M. 2019) ("Brady does not require the United States to disclose impeachment evidence before suppression hearings."). 101. Doc.......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT