Court: District Court, D. Puerto Rico; February 24, 2014; Federal District Court
Defendant Carlos Camacho-Santiago filed a motion in limine to exclude testimony from two government witnesses, which the Court has held in abeyance. The first witness, Javier Olmo-Rivera, is expected to testify about Camacho's involvement in drug trafficking in the 1990s. Camacho argues this testimony is inadmissible under Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) as it constitutes evidence of past crimes offered to prove his character. The government counters that the testimony is relevant to demonstrate opportunity, intent, and knowledge. However, the Court finds the government's argument fails to establish any "special relevance" that would exempt the evidence from Rule 404(b), noting it appears intended to show Camacho acted in conformity with prior bad acts. Therefore, the Court will not rule on the applicability of Rule 403 at this time and will await a factual basis for further consideration of Olmo's testimony.
The second witness, Arnaldo Sierra-Meléndez, is expected to testify about a confrontation in 2007 or 2008 regarding stolen cocaine, during which he was threatened by a person named "Gemelo." Camacho seeks to exclude this testimony as well, but the excerpt does not provide the Court's ruling on this issue.
Sierra did not identify 'Gemelo' during his grand jury testimony and did not describe his physical characteristics. Camacho argues that the Jencks materials provided by the government show that Sierra was not presented with a photo array, rendering any identification at trial unreliable and a violation of his due process rights under the Fourteenth Amendment. The government claims that while Sierra was shown a series of photographs of his co-conspirators, he was not shown a photo at the time of his 2009 testimony. Sierra described 'Gemelo' as a 'white Hispanic male, approximately 5'11', brown hair, brown eyes, and heavy set.' The government intends to introduce Sierra’s in-court identification of Camacho, not an out-of-court identification. A two-prong test determines the admissibility of identifications: first, whether the identification procedure was impermissibly suggestive, and second, if so, the reliability of the identification based on a five-point index from Neil v. Biggers. The court lacks information about the out-of-court identification procedure, but infers from government arguments that a single photograph may have been shown to Sierra, which the government claims is not suggestive since Sierra and Camacho knew each other. The court holds Camacho’s motion in limine regarding Sierra’s in-court identification testimony in abeyance due to insufficient factual basis to assess the totality of circumstances. Camacho asserts that the government’s Jencks disclosures do not indicate Sierra's participation in a photo array or identification of Camacho, while the government contends that Sierra was shown photographs of co-conspirators. The government is ordered to clarify why Sierra’s descriptions and identifications do not qualify as Jencks material by February 26, 2014. The court concludes by holding Camacho’s motion in abeyance and ordering the requested clarification.
Confusion exists regarding the timing of Olmo's allegations about Camacho's involvement in drug trafficking with Tuntún. Camacho cites Olmo's testimony as referring to activities in the 1990s, while the government suggests that Olmo's testimony also pertains to activities in 2007, which falls within the indictment's timeframe. The government's references to drug trafficking "close to the timeframe" of 1999 further complicate the issue. If Olmo's testimony relates to 2007, it may not be considered prior bad act evidence, making the inquiry moot. Conversely, if it pertains to activities before or outside the indictment's scope, it would qualify as prior bad act evidence and be subject to scrutiny under Rule 404(b). Since most arguments center on alleged drug trafficking in the 1990s, prior to the indicted conduct, the Court will analyze these evidentiary issues as prior bad acts. Note that "Gemelo" is an alias for Camacho.
