United States v. Young, CR 17-0694 JB
| Decision Date | 08 January 2019 |
| Docket Number | No. CR 17-0694 JB,CR 17-0694 JB |
| Parties | UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. APACHE YOUNG, Defendant. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of New Mexico |
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on: (i) the Defendant's Motion in Limine to Exclude Mention of West Mesa Burials, filed September 10, 2018 (Doc. 74)("Burials Motion"); (ii) the Defendant's Motion in Limine to Exclude Mention of Panties, filed September 10, 2018 (Doc. 75)("Panties Motion"); (iii) the Defendant's Motion in Limine to Exclude Opinion as to Source of Tattoos, filed September 10, 2018 (Doc. 76)("Tattoos Motion"); (iv) the Defendant's Motion in Limine to Exclude Mention of and Speculation Regarding Items Observed in Old Water Tank, filed September 12, 2018 (Doc. 82)("Items Motion"); (v) the United States' Notice Pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 609, filed November 8, 2018 (Doc. 121)("609 Notice"); (vi) the United States' Motion in Limine Requesting that Counsel be Precluded from Referencing the First Trial, from Making Arguments Unsupported by the Record, and From Asking Inappropriate Questions on Direct or Cross-examination, filed November 23, 2018 (Doc. 123)("First Trial Motion"); (vii) the United States' Motion in Limine to Allow Cross-examination of Defense Witnesses Regarding the Contents of Defendant's Red Dodge Pick-up Truck, filed November 9, 2018 (Doc. 124)("Contents Motion"); and (viii) the United States' Motion in Limine to Allow the Testimony at Trial of N.M. Probation and Parole Officer Ronald Barela, filed November 22, 2018 (Doc. 127)("Testimony Motion"). The Court held hearings on September 12, 2018, and November 28, 2018. The primary issues are: (i) whether the Court should preclude references to the West Mesa burials or murders,1 which continue to receive considerable media coverage; (ii) whether the Court should preclude references to women's underwear found in Defendant Apache Young's pickup truck; (iii) whether the Court should preclude references to the likely source of Young's tattoos as prison tattoos; (iv) whether the Court should preclude mention of or speculation regarding the items -- feces, blood, and a purported children's water toy -- that Albuquerque Police Officer Jason Harvey observed in the water tank near Young's pickup; (v) whether the Court should, if Young elects to testify at trial, permit Plaintiff United States of America to introduce, pursuant to rule 609 of the Federal Rules of Evidence, the name of the crimes, the dates of the crimes, and the imposed sentences in Young's prior convictions; (vi) whether the Court should preclude mention of the first trial, which ended in a mistrial, at the second trial; (vii) whether the Court should permit cross-examination of Young's witnesses regarding the contents of Young's pickup truck; and (viii) whether the Court should allow the United States to call New Mexico Probation and Parole Officer Ronald Barela to testify about the terms and conditions of Young's probation, which disqualified Young from possessing firearms. The Court concludes that it will preclude, in Young's second trial on the felon in possession charge, references to: (i) the West Mesa burials or murders; (ii) the women's underwear found in Young's truck; (iii) the likely source of Young's tattoos; (iv) the items that Harvey observed in the water tank; (v) Young's prior convictions' names and sentences for impeachment purposes; (vi) Young's September 17, 2018,trial; (vii) cross-examination of Young's witnesses regarding the women's underwear, brass knuckles, methamphetamine pipe, and pornography, but not reference to the ski mask, shovel, marijuana, marijuana pipe, and alcohol; and (viii) Barela's testimony about Young's probation terms and conditions, because the Court concludes that the precluded references' prejudice to Young substantially outweighs their probative value.
On March 14, 2017, a federal grand jury returned an indictment2 charging Young with being a felon in possession of a firearm, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1). See Indictment at 1, filed March 14, 2017 (Doc. 2). The Court ordered Young's trial to commence on September 17, 2018. See Order to Continue at 2, filed September 7, 2018 (Doc. 69). Before trial, Young filed the Burials Motion, the Panties Motion, the Tattoos Motion, and the Items Motion. See Burials Motion at 1; Panties Motion at 1; Tattoos Motion at 1; Items Motion at 1.
In the Burials Motion, Young moves the Court to preclude testimony or evidence regarding or mentioning the "infamous West Mesa Burials."3 Burial Motion at 1. Young notes that the WestMesa is the scene of an unsolved homicide investigation involving "eleven dead human bodies," Burial Motion at 1-2, and that Young's arrest in this case occurred "in an area not far distant from where the bodies were found," Burial Motion at 2. Young adds that Harvey, a United States witness, has testified that he was "heavily involved" in the West Mesa Murders investigation. Burial Motion at 2. Young asserts that evidence related to the West Mesa Murders "would not only be irrelevant to this Matter, it would be highly prejudicial and would almost inevitably lead to jury speculation that the Defendant was, in some manner, involved with the bodies." Burial Motion at 2 (citing Fed. R. Evid. 403 and 404).
In the Panties Motion, Young moves the Court to preclude testimony about or evidence of the women's underwear found in the truck that Young was driving on November 13, 2018. See Panties Motion at 1. Young contends that the underwear is not relevant to the charge in this case. See Panties Motion at 1. Moreover, according to Young, reference to the underwear could cause the jury to speculate improperly why Young had them in the truck, which could prejudice Young. See Panties Motion at 2-3. Hence, Young concludes, rules 403 and 404 of the Federal Rules of Evidence advise against permitting the jury to hear testimony referencing the underwear. See Panties Motion at 2-3.
In the Tattoos Motion, Young moves the Court to preclude testimony or evidence regarding Young's tattoos' source. See Tattoos Motion at 1. Young states that Harvey observed the numerous tattoos on Young's torso, and, at the June 26, 2018, suppression hearing, Harvey statedhis opinion that Young received the tattoos in prison. See Tattoos Motion at 1. Young contends that Harvey lacks the qualifications to render an opinion regarding the tattoo's source and that the tattoos' source is irrelevant. See Tattoos Motion at 1. Moreover, according to Young, Harvey's opinion is prejudicial, because it would lead the jury to speculate impermissibly regarding facts surrounding Young's prior incarceration. See Tattoos Motion at 2. Hence, Young concludes, rules 403 and 404 weigh against permitting the jury to hear testimony referencing Young's tattoos' source. See Tattoos Motion at 2.
In the Items Motion, Young moves the Court to preclude testimony or evidence regarding Harvey's observation of "fresh feces and blood, and an unknown object that looked like a children's water toy that also had feces and blood on it," in the water tank. Items Motion at 1-2. Young contends that Harvey found these items within the water tank that Young had exited and thereafter Harvey speculated that Young had been using the water toy to masturbate. See Items Motion at 2. According to Young, Harvey had already arrested Young when Harvey observed the items in the water tank, and, therefore, the items did not bolster Harvey's reasonable suspicion, as Young suspects the United States intends to argue at trial. See Items Motion at 2. Moreover, according to Young, the United States cannot prove that Young placed any items in the water tank. Items Motion at 2. Hence, Young concludes, because the items are both irrelevant and highly prejudicial, rules 403 and 404 strongly weigh against permitting the jury to hear Harvey's testimony regarding what he believed that Young was doing in the water tank, i.e., masturbating with a child's water toy. See Items Motion at 3.
The United States responds to the Burials Motion, the Panties Motion, the Tattoos Motion, and the Items Motion in a single document. See Response by the United States to the Defendant's Motions in Limine, filed September 12, 2018 (Doc. 83)("Response"). In its Response, the United States asserts that it does not intend to introduce evidence of the West Mesa burials. See Response at 1. The United States notes, however, that, if Young attempts to contest Harvey's legitimate presence and familiarity with the West Mesa, the United States will request the Court's permission to introduce Harvey's testimony about his work on the West Mesa murders. See Response at 2.
The United States further contends that, although the "dirt covered young women's panties . . . in close proximity to the burial of multiple young women in a dirt-covered landscape" give the United States "discomfort and pause," the United States will nonetheless refrain from mentioning the underwear. Response at 2. The United States adds, however, that it will pursue such evidence if Young "implicitly or explicitly bring[s] the evidentiary significance of this evidence to life." Response at 2.
Regarding the Tattoo Motion, the United States asserts that Harvey, based on his law enforcement experience and "rationally based perception," is qualified to provide an opinion as to the source of Young's tattoos. Response at 2. The United States notes, however, that it does not intend to develop this opinion evidence "provided that the Defendant does not make the issue relevant and material." Response at 2.
.
The Court held a hearing. See Transcript of Hearing at 1:22-23 (taken September 12, 2018)("Sept. 12 Tr.").4 At the hearing, the Court asked the United States whether it needs to mention the...
To continue reading
Request your trial