United States v. DeLeon
| Decision Date | 23 April 2019 |
| Docket Number | No. CR 15-4268 JB,CR 15-4268 JB |
| Citation | 406 F.Supp.3d 1129 |
| 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. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of New Mexico |
John C. Anderson, United States Attorney, 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.
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.
Russel 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, Attorneys for Defendant Eugene Martinez.
Phillip A. Linder, The Linder Firm, Dallas, Texas --and-- Jeffrey C. Lahann, Las Cruces, New Mexico, Attorneys for Defendant Allen Patterson.
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, LLC, Denver, Colorado --and-- Noel Orquiz, Deming, New Mexico, Attorneys for Defendant Javier Alonso.
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.
Leon Encinias, Lean Encinias Attorney at Law, Albuquerque, New Mexico --and-- Pedro Pineda, Las Cruces, 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.
Amy E. Jacks, Law Office of Amy E. Jacks, Los Angeles, California --and-- Richard Jewkes, El Paso, Texas --and-- Lauren Noriega, The Noriega Law Firm, Los Angeles, California, Attorneys for Defendant Daniel Sanchez.
George A. Harrison, Las Cruces, New Mexico --and-- Kimberly S. Brusuelas-Benavidez, Albuquerque, New Mexico, Attorneys for Defendant Gerald Archuleta.
B.J. Crow, Crow Law Firm, Roswell, New Mexico, Attorneys 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, McElhinney Law Firm, LLC, 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, Albuquerque, New Mexico, Attorneys for Defendant Rudy Perez.
Lisa Torraco, Albuquerque, New Mexico --and-- Donavon A. Roberts, Albuquerque, New Mexico, Attorneys for Defendant Andrew Gallegos.
Erlinda O. Johnson, Law Office of Erlinda Ocampo Johnson, LLC, Albuquerque, New Mexico, Attorneys for Defendant Santos Gonzalez.
Keith R. Romero, Albuquerque, New Mexico, Attorney for Defendant Paul Rivera.
Angela Arellanes, Albuquerque, New Mexico, Attorney for Defendant Shauna Gutierrez.
Jerry A. Walz, Walz and Associates, Albuquerque, New Mexico, Attorneys for Defendant Brandy Rodriguez.
James O. Browning, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE THIS MATTER comes before the Court on: (i) the United States' Sealed Supplemental Notice of Proposed James1 Statements for Trial II, filed April 19, 2018 (Doc. 2135)("James Notice"); (ii) the United States' Sealed Trial Brief Regarding Michael Jaramillo’s Testimony, filed April 20, 2018 (Doc. 2138)("Brief"); and (iii) the Defendants' oral motion to exclude Michael Jaramillo’s testimony. The primary issues are: (i) whether Plaintiff United States of America must comply with 18 U.S.C. § 3432 -- which provides certain procedural protections to "[a] person charged with treason or other capital offense" -- if the United States does not seek to impose the death penalty in a particular case; (ii) whether the United States' failure to include Jaramillo in its pretrial witness list violates 18 U.S.C. § 3432 if that statute applies; (iii) whether excluding Jaramillo’s testimony is an appropriate remedy for the United States' § 3432 violation if one occurred; and (iv) whether, if Jaramillo takes the stand, the out-of-court statements that the United States identifies in the James Notice and which Jaramillo will relate to the jury are admissible for their truth as co-conspirator statements under rule 801(d)(2)(E) of the Federal Rules of Evidence. The Court concludes that a capital offense is "[a] crime for which the death penalty may be imposed," Capital Offense, Black’s Law Dictionary (10th ed. 2014), so 18 U.S.C. § 3432 ’s requirements apply even if the United States does not seek to impose the death penalty in a particular case. The Court determines that the United States violated 18 U.S.C. § 3432 by failing to include Jaramillo on its witness list, but the Court also determines that excluding Jaramillo’s testimony is not an appropriate remedy for this violation. Finally, the Court concludes that the out-of-court statements that the James Notice identifies are admissible for their truth.
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 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 as the truth. The Court recognizes that the factual background largely reflects the United States' version of events and that the Defendants are all presumed innocent.
This case deals with crimes that the Syndicato de Nuevo Mexico ("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 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." Indictment at 2-3.
SNM is a violent prison gang formed in the early 1980s at the Penitentiary of New Mexico ("PNM") after a violent prison riot at the PNM during which inmates seriously assaulted and raped twelve correctional officers after taking them hostage. See Indictment at 3. During the riot, thirty-three inmates were killed, and over 200 were injured. See Indictment at 3. After the PNM riot, SNM expanded throughout the state’s prison system and has had as many as 500 members. See Indictment at 3. SNM now has approximately 250 members, and "a ‘panel’ or ‘mesa’ (Spanish for table) of leaders who issue orders to subordinate gang members." Indictment at 3. SNM controls drug distribution and other illegal activities within the New Mexico penal system, but it also conveys orders outside the prison system. See Indictment at 3. Members who rejoin their communities after completing their sentences are expected to further the gang’s goals, the main one being the control of and profit from narcotics trafficking. See Indictment at 3-4. Members who fail "to show continued loyalty to the gang [are] disciplined in various ways, ... includ[ing] murder and assaults." Indictment at 4. SNM also "intimidate[es] and influenc[es] smaller New Mexico Hispanic gangs" to expand its illegal activities. Indictment at 4. If another gang does not abide by SNM’s demands, SNM will assault or kill one of the other gang’s members to show its power. See Indictment at 4....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
United States v. Deleon
...and that therefore the United States has disclosure obligations under 18 U.S.C. § 3432. See United States v. DeLeon, 406 F.Supp.3d 1129, 1179–78, 2019 WL 1780092, at *27 (D.N.M. 2019) (Browning, J.). Accordingly, the Count 1 Defendants are entitled to the United States' witness list at leas......
-
United States v. O'Dowd
...only applies to “reports of what the declarant has actually observed through the senses, not to what the declarant merely conjectures.” Id. (internal quotation omitted). The rationale underlying Rule 803(1) is that the “substantial contemporaneity of event and statement minimizes unreliabil......