United States v. Deleon

Decision Date05 December 2019
Docket NumberNo. CR 15-4268 JB,CR 15-4268 JB
CitationUnited States v. Deleon, 426 F.Supp.3d 878 (D. N.M. 2019)
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, Mat thew 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 DefendantAngel DeLeon.

Richard Sindel, Sindel, Sindel & Noble, P.C., Clayton, Missouri --and-- Brock Benjamin, Benjamin Law Firm, El Paso, Texas, Attorneys for DefendantJoe 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 DefendantEdward Troup.

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

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

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

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

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

Nathan D. Chambers, Nathan D. Chambers, Attorney at Law, Denver, Colorado --and-- Noel Orquiz, Deming, New Mexico, Attorneys for DefendantJavier 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 DefendantArturo Arnulfo Garcia.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Joe Spencer, El Paso, Texas --and-- Mary Stillinger, El Paso, Texas, Attorneys for DefendantMauricio 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 DefendantDaniel Sanchez.

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Donavon A. Roberts, Albuquerque, New Mexico --and-- Lisa Torraco, Albuquerque, New Mexico, Attorneys for DefendantAndrew Gallegos.

Erlinda O. Johnson, Law Office of Erlinda Ocampo Johnson, Albuquerque, New Mexico, Attorney for DefendantSantos 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 DefendantShauna Gutierrez.

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

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

JAMES O. BROWNING, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

THIS MATTER comes before the Court on the Defendants' Omnibus Motion for Timely Discovery of Giglio Materials, filed May 24, 2017(Doc. 1163)("Motion"). held a hearing on November 8, 2017.The primary issue is whether the Defendants' twenty requested categories of evidence fall under Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150, 92 S.Ct. 763, 31 L.Ed.2d 104(1972)("Giglio"), and, if so, when the United States must disclose the materials.Specifically, the Court must decide: (i) whether the Defendants are entitled to Plaintiff United States of America's witnesses' competency and mental health records; (ii) whether the Defendants are entitled, under Giglio, to the United States' witnesses' last known addresses; (iii) the United States' deadline to produce its witness list; and (iv) the United States' deadline to produce records of all payments and consideration given to its cooperating witnesses.The Court concludes that: (i)the Defendants' requested records concerning the competency and mental health treatment of each of the United States' witnesses are not in the United States' possession or control; (ii) the United States is not required under Giglio to produce the last known addresses of each of its witnesses; (iii) the United States must produce a good-faith witness list no later than two weeks prior to each trial; and (iv) the United States must disclose all payments issued to its cooperating witnesses no later than two months before each trial.

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, filedDecember 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 the SNM allegedly committed through its members.Indictmentat 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."Indictmentat 2.SNM constitutes an enterprise "as defined in Title 18, United States Code, Section 1959(b)(2), that is, a group of individuals associated in fact that engaged in, and the activities of which affected, interstate and foreign commerce."Indictmentat 2-3.

SNM is a prison gang that formed in the early 1980s at the Penitentiary of New Mexico ("PNM") after a violent prison riot at PNM during which inmates assaulted and raped twelve correctional officers after taking them hostage.Indictmentat 3.During the riot, thirty-three inmates were killed, and over 200 inmates were injured.SeeIndictmentat 3.After the PNM riot, SNM expanded throughout the state's prison system and has had as many as 500 members.SeeIndictmentat 3.SNM now has approximately 250 members, including "a panel or ‘mesa’(Spanish for table) of leaders who issue orders to subordinate gang members."Indictmentat 3.SNM controls drug distribution and other illegal activities within the New Mexico penal system, but it also conveys orders to members outside the prison system.SeeIndictmentat 3.Members who rejoin their communities after completing their sentences are expected to further the gang's goals: primarily the control and profit of narcotics trafficking.SeeIndictmentat 3-4.Members who fail "to show continued loyalty to the gang [are] disciplined in various ways, [ ] includ[ing] murder and assaults."Indictmentat 4.SNM also intimidates and influences smaller New Mexico Hispanic gangs to expand its power.SeeIndictmentat 4.If another gang does not follow SNM's demands, SNM will assault or kill one of the other gang's members to show its power.SeeIndictmentat 4.SNM's rivalry with other gangs also manifests itself in beatings and stabbings within the prison system....

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
2 cases
  • United States v. Sampson
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — Eastern District of Michigan
    • 17 Enero 2024
    ... ... rights will be “amply protect[ed]” by his ability ... to thoroughly question the minor victim about her purported ... changing accounts of the alleged events during cross ... examination. See United States v. DeLeon, 426 ... F.Supp.3d 878, 921 (D.N.M. 2019) ...          Finally, ... the Court notes the untimeliness of Defendant's requests ... Defendant sought the minor victim's mental health records ... on the day after the original date for trial in this matter ... ...
  • Hinkel v. Colling
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of Wyoming
    • 30 Junio 2021
    ...communications made to licensed psychiatrists, psychologists, and social workers in the course of psychotherapy. United States v. DeLeon, 426 F. Supp. 3d 878, 906 (D.N.M. 2019). That is, the communications must be made in the course of diagnosis and treatment. Id. at 905. Like other testimo......