United States v. DeLeon
| Decision Date | 14 September 2021 |
| Docket Number | CR 15-4268 JB |
| 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 |
Fred Federici Acting United States Attorney United States Attorney's Office Albuquerque, New Mexico and Maria Ysabel Armijo Randy M. Castellano Ryan Ellison Assistant United States Attorneys United States Attorney's Office Las Cruces, New Mexico Attorneys for the Plaintiff
Sarah M. Gorman Law Offices of Robert D. Gorman Albuquerque, New Mexico and Heather M. LeBlanc Bailey, LeBlanc & Lane P.C. 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 Robert R. Cooper Law Firm 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 Law offices of Eduardo Solis El Paso, Texas and John L. Granberg Granberg Law Office El Paso, Texas and Orlando Mondragon The Law Office of Orlando Mondragon El Paso, Texas Attorneys for Defendant Christopher Chavez
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 Law Offices of Scott Moran Davidson Albuquerque, New Mexico-and-- Billy R. Blackburn Billy Blackburn Law Office 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
Richard Jewkes El Paso, Texas and Lauren Noriega The Noriega Law Firm Los Angeles, California 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 Marcia J. Milner Attorney at Law Las Cruces, New Mexico Attorney for Defendant Roy Paul Martinez
Christopher W. Adams Adams & Bischoff, L.L.C. Charleston, South Carolina and Amy Sirignano Law Office of Amy Sirignano, P.C. Albuquerque, New Mexico Attorneys for Defendant Christopher Garcia
William R. Maynard William R. Maynard Attorney at Law 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 Justine Fox-Young Attorney at Law Albuquerque, New Mexico and Ryan J. Villa Law Office of Ryan J. Villa Albuquerque, New Mexico Attorneys for Defendant Rudy Perez
Donavon A. Roberts Donavon A. Roberts Attorney at Law Albuquerque, New Mexico and Lisa Torraco Lisa Torracco Attorney at Law 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 Angela Arellanes Attorney at Law 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
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on the United States' Motion to Exclude Expert Witness or in the Alternative to Hold a Daubert Hearing, filed June 28, 2021 (Doc. 3293)(“Motion”). The Court held a hearing on August 2, 2021. See Clerk's Minutes at 1, filed August 2, 2021 (Doc. 3408). The primary issue is whether Dr. Michael Spence may testify at Defendant Angel DeLeon's trial about the procedures the New Mexico Department of Public Safety's Crime Laboratory (“Crime Lab”) followed when collecting and testing evidence recovered from the scene of Frank Castillo's murder at the Southern New Mexico Correctional Facility in 2001, and, if the Court allows Dr. Spence to testify, whether he may testify: (i) about the risk of cross-contamination generally, and about the procedures the Crime Lab followed when testing evidence recovered from the scene of the alleged murder of Frank Castillo in March, 2001, and whether those procedures could have allowed for DNA cross-contamination; (ii) about the procedures the Crime Lab did or did not follow; and (iii) whether Tokumaru's reanalysis of the collected DNA samples demonstrates that the detection of DeLeon's DNA on the murder weapon is not scientifically reproducible. The Court concludes that: (i) DeLeon's disclosure meets rule 16(b)(1)(C)'s requirements, because it was timely and offers an appropriate summary of Dr. Spence's proposed testimony; (ii) DeLeon demonstrates that Dr. Spence applied reliably industry-accepted principles when analyzing Radecki and Tokumaru's analyses; and (iii) Dr. Spence (a) may testify about the risk of cross-contamination generally, and about the procedures the Crime Lab followed when testing evidence recovered from the scene of the alleged murder of Frank Castillo in March, 2001, and whether those procedures could have allowed for DNA cross-contamination, (b) may not testify about the procedures the Crime Lab did or did not follow -- or the likelihood of cross-contamination -- if, to form an opinion, Dr. Spence must speculate about what the Crime Lab did, and (c) may not testify that the reanalysis of the collected DNA samples by Tokumaru, the author of the 2014 report, demonstrates that the detection of DeLeon's DNA on the murder weapon is not scientifically reproducible. The Court, therefore, will grant the Motion in part and deny the Motion in part.
The Court takes its background facts from the Second Superseding Indictment, filed March 9, 2017 (Doc 947)(“Indictment”). The background facts largely are unchanged from those facts that the Court provides in its Memorandum Opinion and Order, 423 F.Supp.3d 1210, filed November 19, 2019 (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 and that the Defendants are all presumed innocent. The Court takes the particular facts relevant to this case largely from the Defendant's Notice of Expert Witness Testimony, filed December 21, 2020 (Doc. 3220)(“Notice”), and the attached documents.
1.Background Facts.
This case deals with crimes that SNM allegedly committed through its members. See Indictment at 2. SNM, through its members, operates in the District of New Mexico, and its members engage in acts of violence and other criminal activities, “including murder, kidnapping, attempted murder, conspiracy to manufacture/distribute narcotics, and firearms trafficking.” Indictment at 2. The 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.
...
To continue reading
Request your trial