United States v. Edwards, CR 16–3068 JB
| Decision Date | 22 August 2017 |
| Docket Number | No. CR 16–3068 JB,CR 16–3068 JB |
| Parties | UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff, v. James EDWARDS, Defendant |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of New Mexico |
James D. Tierney, Acting United States Attorney, Nicholas James Marshall, Novaline Wilson, Assistant United States Attorneys, United States Attorney's Office, Albuquerque, New Mexico, Attorneys for the Plaintiff.
Marshall J. Ray, Law Offices of Marshall J. Ray LLC, Nicole Moss, The Law Office of Nicole W. Moss LLC, Albuquerque, New Mexico, Attorneys for the Defendant.
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on: (i) the United States' Sealed Motion In Limine to Admit Evidence Pursuant to Fed. R. Evid. 404(b), 413, and 608, filed June 21, 2017 (Doc. 59)("the United States' Motion"); and (ii) the Defendant's Second Motion In Limine to Exclude Evidence of Similar Crimes in Sexual Assault Cases, filed June 21, 2017 (Doc. 58)("Edwards' Motion"). The Court held a motion hearing on June 22, 2017. The primary issues are whether the Court should admit: (i) evidence regarding previous sexual assault allegations, which state that C.E.A., Defendant James Edwards' teenage daughter, accused her father of sexual abuse via a Facebook post; (ii) C.E.A.'s interview with Bureau of Indian Affairs Special Agent Marcelino ToersBijns, in which C.E.A. denied accusing her father of sexual abuse via Facebook, but indicated she may have been abused before; and (iii) the Amelia D. Garcia interview, in which Garcia indicates that Edwards has a reputation for sexual impropriety. The Court must determine whether the evidence is admissible rules 413, 403, 608, or 404(b) of the Federal Rules of Evidence.
The Court will deny the United States' Motion. The Court concludes that the evidence regarding the previous sexual assault allegations, the evidence from C.E.A.'s interview with ToersBijns, and the evidence from the Garcia interview are inadmissible under rule 413 because the because the proffered evidence lacks sufficient detail to establish that the alleged other acts occurred, and because the proffered evidence is based on unreliable hearsay statements. In addition, rule 403 bars the evidence. The Court concludes that the evidence, which suggests that Edwards sexually abused his daughter, presents the dangers of confusing the issues and misleading the jury. The dangers substantially outweigh the evidence's probative value; the evidence lacks reliability and specificity, which reduce the evidence's probative value. Furthermore, rule 608 is inapplicable because the proffered evidence does not involve Edwards' character for truthfulness or untruthfulness; the evidence regards Edwards' character for sexual impropriety rather than his character for truthfulness.
The evidence regards The Court will grant in part Edwards' Motion. The evidence will be inadmissible unless Edwards: (i) testifies with broad statements or generalizations denying any sexual misconduct, in which case Edwards may open the door to the proffered evidence regarding the sexual assault allegations, C.E.A.'s interview statement regarding the sexual assault allegations, and Garcia's interview statement on Edwards' reputation for sexual impropriety; or (ii) offers reputation evidence for his character for sexual purity, in which case the Garcia's interview statements on Edwards' reputation for sexual impropriety may be admissible as reputation evidence under rule 405 of the Federal Rules of Evidence.
Edwards is a practitioner of traditional medicine at the Pueblo of Acoma. See Transcript of Motion Hearing (taken June 27, 2017) at 41:17–20 (Ray), filed June 30, 2017 (Doc. 82)("2017 Tr."). The alleged victim asserts that she went to Edwards for a traditional healing rub1 at Edwards' home. See 2017 Tr. at 26:25–27:3 (Marshall). The alleged victim asserts that, when she arrived, she made the traditional offering of cornmeal for the healing services. See 2017 Tr. at 26:25–27:3 (Marshall). According to the alleged victim, Edwards refused the offering of cornmeal. See 2017 Tr. at 27:5–10 (Marshall). Edwards then commenced the rub. See 2017 Tr. at 27:10–12 (Marshall). The alleged victim contends that, during the encounter, Edwards turned her, forcibly removed her pants, and placed his mouth on her genitalia. See 2017 Tr. at 27:13–17 (Marshall). The indictment charges that Edwards, on or about December 25, 2014, and continuing through January 31, 2015, unlawfully and knowingly engaged in and attempted to engage in a sexual act with V.S. by force. See Indictment at ¶ 1, at 1, filed July 12, 2016 (Doc. 2).
Edwards filed a motion in limine to exclude the information from ToersBijns' interviews with C.E.A. and Garcia on June 21, 2017. See Edwards' Motion at 1. The United States filed a motion in limine to admit the information on June 21, 2017. See United States' Motion at 1. The Court held a motion proceeding on June 22, 2017. See 2017 Tr. at 1:11–13. The hearing, in part, addressed the United States' Motion and Edwards' Motion.
During the course of his investigation, ToersBijns reviewed a report from Delia Edwards, Edwards' daughter. See United States' Motion at 1. D. Edwards reported that her sister, C.E.A., who is also J. Edwards' daughter, posted a sexual assault allegation against J. Edwards on Facebook. See United States' Motion at 1. J. Edwards' ex-wife Jennifer relayed these allegations to the State of New Mexico Children, Youth, and Families Department Child Protective Services ("CYFD"). See United States' Motion at 1–2; 2017 Tr. at 113:12–25 (Moss). CYFD drafted an intake form, which included a narrative report. See United States' Motion at 1–2; 2017 Tr. 113:12–25 (Moss); id. at 116:6–15 (Court). The narrative report stated:
Today stating that the alleged victim posted on Facebook she was sexually assaulted by her father. Did not indicate when or how often. Jennifer stated father is currently in federal prison for sexually assaulting a woman. Source does not know when the last time contact with her father was. Source has no further information. Source has not seen the post on Facebook. Jennifer told source father will be incarcerated for the next two years.
2017 Tr. at 116:6–15 (Court). The person who received the CYFD report and completed the form, the "source," appears to be an unknown social worker. See 2017 Tr. at 116:6–17 (Court); id. 117:9–11 (Marshall). The social media post is not part of the record. See 2017 Tr. at 112:6–13 (Marshall); id. at 113:12–25 (Moss). The CYFD intake form indicated the existence of the Facebook post, but stated that the post was quickly deleted. See 2017 Tr. at 112:6–7 (Marshall); id. 113:14–25 (Moss); United States' Motion at 2.
ToersBijns interviewed C.E.A. on December 8, 2016. See United States' Motion at 2. During the interview, ToersBijns referenced the allegation that C.E.A. had posted an accusation on social media that her father had sexually abused her. See 2017 Tr. at 111:24–112:13 (Marshall). ToersBijns' inquiry was based at least in part on the CYFD intake form. See 2017 Tr. at 113:14–20 (Moss); United States' Motion at 2. C.E.A. said that her sister told her that she had screenshots of the alleged social media post. See United States' Motion at 2. C.E.A. also stated that she did not know why her sister would say that she made such a social media post. See United States' Motion at 2. C.E.A. denied making the social media post and denied the sexual misconduct allegations the alleged social media post references. See 2017 Tr. at 112:12–13 (Marshall); United States' Motion at 2. C.E.A. stated that she has past trauma with her family, and that she could have been abused when she was little. See United States' Motion at 2. C.E.A. stated, however, that she did not remember whether she was abused. See United States' Motion at 2. C.E.A. added that she gets depressed, that she cuts herself, and that she had to receive treatment for her condition. See United States' Motion at 2. ToersBijns drafted a Notice of Allegation after the interview. See United States' Motion at 2. In the Notice of Allegation, ToersBijns wrote that C.E.A. had previously disclosed to her mother that she had been sexually abused, but she did not specify a suspect. See United States' Motion at 2. ToersBijns noted that no one had reported these allegations to the police. See United States' Motion at 2.
The United States seeks admission of "the allegations related to C.E.A.'s Facebook post...." See United States' Motion at 3. This includes the following evidence surrounding the allegations: (i) the sexual assault allegations contained within the CYFD intake form—i.e. that C.E.A. posted sexual assault allegations on Facebook ("CYFD Intake Form"); (ii) D. Edwards' statement that her sister posted sexual assault allegations on Facebook and Edwards' ex-wife's report to CYFD of D. Edwards' accusation ("Facebook Accusations"); (iii) C.E.A.'s statements regarding her past trauma—i.e. that she thinks she had been abused before, and that she had received mental health treatment ("C.E.A.'s Interview Statement"); (iv) ToersBijns' question to C.E.A. about the Facebook post's allegations and C.E.A.'s subsequent denial ("C.E.A.'s Denial"); and (v) ToersBijns' Notice of Allegation in which he recorded C.E.A.'s statements about her past abuse ("Notice of Allegation"). See United States' Motion at 1–2, 4.
ToersBijns interviewed Garcia and drafted a report after the interview. See United States' Motion at 2. During the interview, ToersBijns asked about Garcia's version of events on the day of the alleged assault. See United States' Motion at 2....
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
United States v. Begay
...primarily of anonymous, out-of-court statements and "rumors" corroborating that the prior acts happened. United States v. Edwards, 272 F. Supp. 3d 1270, 1284 (D.N.M. 2017) (Browning). The Court concluded that the proffered evidence did not contain enough specific information to outline a sp......
- Gallegos v. Bernalillo Cnty. Bd. of Cnty. Comm'rs