United States v. Deleon, CR 15–4268 JB

Decision Date07 March 2018
Docket NumberNo. CR 15–4268 JB,CR 15–4268 JB
Citation287 F.Supp.3d 1187
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

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.

Pedro Pineda, Las Cruces, New Mexico, Attorney 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.

Jacqueline K. Walsh, Walsh & Larranaga, Seattle, Washington, 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, Attorneys for Defendant Daniel Sanchez.

George A. Harrison, Las Cruces, New Mexico, Attorney 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, 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.

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

Jerry A. Walz, Walz and Associates, Albuquerque, New Mexico, Attorneys for Defendant Brandy Rodriguez.

MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

James O. Browning, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGETHIS MATTER comes before the Court on: (i) Defendant Santos Gonzales' Motion for Production of Alleged Co–Conspirator Statements, Pre–Trial Hearing on Their Admissibility Pursuant to Fed.R.Evid. 801(d)(2)(E), filed May 9, 2017 (Doc. 1141)("Gonzales Motion"); (ii) Defendant Rudy Perez's Motion for Production of Alleged Co–Conspirator Statements and for Pre–Trial Hearing on Their Admissibility, filed August 21, 2017 (Doc. 1228)("Perez Motion"); (iii) the Opposed Motion for Specification of Co–Conspirator Statements and a Pre–Trial Hearing on the Statements' Admissibility, filed October 6, 2017 (Doc. 1303)("C. Garcia Motion"); (iv) Motion to Prevent the Admission of Statements of Non–Testifying Codefendants Implicating Defendant Billy Garcia and for an Order for the Government to Specify Such Statements Prior to Trial, filed October 10, 2017 (Doc. 1307)("B. Garcia Motion"); (v) Motion for James Hearing and Determination of Co–Conspirator Statements Admissibility at a Pre–Trial Hearing, filed October 13, 2017)(Doc. 1317)("J. Gallegos Motion"); (vi) Defendant Shauna Gutierrez' Opposed Motion for a James Hearing, filed October 13, 2017 (Doc. 1321)("Gutierrez Motion"); (vii) Motion in Limine to Exclude Statement of Cooperating Government Witnesses, filed November 30, 2017 (Doc. 1514)("Perez MIL"); (viii) Opposed Motion in Limine to Exclude Co–Defendant's [sic] Statements, filed December 1, 2017 (Doc. 1517)("C. Garcia MIL"); (ix) Defendant Anthony Ray Baca's Motion in Limine to Prohibit the Government From Questioning Jerry Armenta About Defendant Anthony Ray Baca's Involvement in Counts 6 & 7, filed December 4, 2017 (Doc. 1540)("Baca MIL"); (x) Defendant Daniel Sanchez's Motion in Limine to Preclude the Admission of Un–Confronted, Out of Court Statements Proffered by the Government at the James Hearing, filed January 8, 2018 (Doc. 1616)("Sanchez MIL"); and (xi) the Joint Motion to Renew Motion to Sever Defendants Charged with Offenses in Counts 6 and 7, filed January 21, 2018 (Doc. 1664)("Severance Motion"). The Court held hearings on November 27–29, 2017, December 8, 2017, December 19–20, 2017, and January 9, 2018. See Transcript of Hearing (held November 27, 2017), filed December 6, 2017 (Doc. 1545)("Nov. 27 Tr."); Transcript of Hearing (held November 28, 2017), filed December 6, 2017 (Doc. 1546)("Nov. 28 Tr."); Transcript of Hearing (held November 29, 2017), filed December 6, 2017 (Doc. 1547)("Nov. 29 Tr."); Transcript of Hearing (held December 8, 2017), filed December 15, 2017 (Doc. 1577)("Dec. 8 Tr."); Transcript of Hearing (held December 19, 2017), filed January 4, 2018 (Doc. 1608)("Dec. 19 Tr."); Transcript of Hearing (held December 20, 2017), filed January 5, 2018 (Doc. 1610)("Dec. 20 Tr."); Transcript of Hearing (held January 9, 2018), filed January 24, 2018 (Doc. 1683)("Jan. 9 Tr."). The primary issues are whether the out-of-court statements—largely statements of Defendants Daniel Sanchez, Anthony Ray Baca, Carlos Herrera, and Rudy Perez, and of cooperating Defendants and other inmates—that Plaintiff United States of America intends to offer in evidence at trial to prove the matterasserted: (i) can be admitted notwithstanding the Sixth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States of America's Confrontation Clause; (ii) can be admitted for their truth, because—as coconspirator statements made during and in furtherance of the conspiracy, see Fed. R. Evid. 801(d)(2)(E)they are not hearsay; (iii) can be admitted, even though they are hearsay, as statements against penal interest made by an unavailable declarant, see Fed. R. Evid. 804(b)(3) ; (iv) can be admitted for their truth, because, as admissions offered against Baca, Herrera, or Perez, see Fed. R. Evid. 801(d)(2)(A), they are not hearsay; (v) can be admitted, with a limiting instruction, in a joint trial if the statement is nontestimonial, incriminates multiple Defendants, and is admissible against some—but not all—of those Defendants; and (vi) necessitate sufficiently many limiting instructions that the Court should alter how the case should be tried. The Court analyzes individually the out-of-court statements at issue and concludes that it can admit nontestimonial statements that are admissible against only some of the Defendants if it gives a limiting instruction. While there will be multiple limiting instructions, the United States' willingness to Bruton-ize1 Baca's, Herrera's, and Perez' statements removes statements that one Defendant made and that directly incriminate other Defendants from the trial, so the jury will never hear those statements.2 Thus, while the Defendants are entitled to limiting instructions under the Federal Rules of Evidence, there is not much, if anything, that the jury could meaningfully use against the non-declarant Defendants. Using the statements in this way does not violate the Fifth or Sixth Amendments, and the Defendants will...

To continue reading

Request your trial
28 cases
  • United States v. Deleon
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of New Mexico
    • 8 September 2021
    ...114 S.Ct. 2431. See United States v. Baca, 447 F. Supp. 3d 1149, 1206-07 (D.N.M. 2020) (Browning, J.); United States v. DeLeon, 287 F. Supp. 3d 1187, 1240 (D.N.M. 2018) (Browning, J.).LAW REGARDING RULE 403 Rule 403 provides: "The court may exclude relevant evidence if its probative value i......
  • Parsons v. Velasquez
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of New Mexico
    • 30 July 2021
    ...statement to be used against anyone other than the party who made the statement, such as codefendants." United States v. DeLeon, 287 F. Supp. 3d 1187, 1256 (D.N.M. 2018) (Browning, J.)(citing United States v. Wolf, 839 F.2d 1387, 1393 & n.4 (10th Cir. 1988) ; Stephen A. Saltzburg, et al., F......
  • United States v. Martinez
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of New Mexico
    • 27 January 2021
    ...violation is not, itself, a conspiracy even though it may have a conspiracy as its underlying offense. United States v. DeLeon, 287 F. Supp. 3d 1187, 1255 (D.N.M. 2018) (Browning, J.).LAW REGARDING THE SPEEDY TRIAL ACT "The dual purpose of the Speedy Trial Act is to protect a defendant's co......
  • State ex rel. Balderas v. Real Estate Law Ctr., P.C.
    • United States
    • U.S. District Court — District of New Mexico
    • 2 July 2019
    ...statement to be used against anyone other than the party who made the statement, such as codefendants." United States v. DeLeon, 287 F. Supp. 3d 1187, 1256 (D.N.M. 2018) (Browning, J.)(citing United States v. Wolf, 839 F.2d 1387, 1393 & n.4 (10th Cir. 1988) ; Stephen A. Saltzburg, et al., F......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

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