Canales-Yanez v. State

472 Md. 132

244 A.3d 1096

Jose CANALES-YANEZ

v.STATE of Maryland

No. 11, Sept. Term, 2020

Court of Appeals of Maryland.

January 29, 2021

Argued by Nancy S. Forster (Forster & LeCompte, Towson, MD) on brief, for Petitioner.

Argued by Benjamin A. Harris, Asst. Atty. Gen. (Brian E. Frosh, Atty. Gen. of Maryland, Baltimore, MD), on brief, for Respondent.

Argued before: Barbera, C.J.; McDonald, Watts, Hotten, Getty, Booth and Biran, JJ.

Barbera, C.J.

At 10:30 p.m. on June 5, 2017, the night before their high school graduation, Shadi Najjar and Artem Ziberov were shot and killed while sitting in Shadi's parked car. The two had been lured to Gallery Court, a cul-de-sac in Montgomery Village, Maryland, believing that they were going to meet up with Roger Garcia to sell him one of Shadi's graduation ceremony tickets. In total, upwards of thirty rounds were fired at the vehicle during this chilling and tragic double homicide.

Four individuals were charged with committing the murders: Roger Garcia, Edgar Garcia-Gaona, Rony Galicia, and Petitioner, Jose Canales-Yanez. After an eight-day bench trial, the Circuit Court for Montgomery County found Petitioner guilty of the murders, concluding that his motive to kill Shadi was that several months earlier Shadi had stolen marijuana from Petitioner's then-pregnant wife and run over her foot with his car while fleeing. The court convicted Petitioner of conspiracy to commit the first-degree murder of Shadi, two counts of first-degree murder, armed robbery, and four counts of use of a firearm in the commission of a felony.

Following the trial, but prior to sentencing, the State informed Petitioner's counsel of an interview that took place between two detectives and the mother and stepfather of one of the State's witnesses, Victoria Kuria. According to Petitioner, during that interview the detectives conveyed threats of prosecuting Ms. Kuria to her mother and stepfather that caused Ms. Kuria to meet with the police the following day and to alter her testimony regarding the events she witnessed on the night of the murders. During the late-disclosed interview, Ms. Kuria's mother also indicated to the detectives that Ms. Kuria had previously said that she did not know who had committed the murders.

Petitioner moved for a new trial on the basis of this alleged newly discovered evidence, arguing that its nondisclosure constituted a violation of Brady v. Maryland , 373 U.S. 83, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963) and its progeny. At the sentencing hearing the circuit court denied the motion, finding that the evidence of the interview was not material, as it would not have affected the verdict. The circuit court then sentenced Petitioner to two consecutive life sentences, without parole, plus forty years. Petitioner appealed and the Court of Special Appeals affirmed the denial of his motion for new trial, holding that the circuit court's determination that the newly discovered evidence was immaterial was not "patently unreasonable."

We are asked to determine whether the circuit court's ruling as to the non-existence of a Brady violation was proper, and whether to endorse the Court of Special Appeals' newly articulated "patently unreasonable" standard of review. Although we decline to adopt the deferential standard of review put forth by the Court of Special Appeals, we affirm that court's ultimate affirmance of the circuit court's determination that the evidence of the interview was not material to the trial, and thus that there was not a Brady violation in this case.

I.Facts and Procedural History

The State's case against Petitioner was long and complex, with testimony from thirty-five witnesses and over 400 exhibits. One of the State's witnesses at trial, Victoria Kuria, had been dating one of the other suspects, Roger Garcia, at the time of the murders. Officers took Roger¹ into custody for his suspected involvement in the murders on or around June 16, 2017. Several days later Ms. Kuria moved in with Roger's family at their trailer home after leaving her mother's and stepfather's house as a result of an argument. Ms. Kuria's First Interview

Ms. Kuria first met with the police on June 29, 2017, after being taken into custody for driving without a license. She spoke with Detective Frank Springer in a recorded interview at the police station. Ms. Kuria explained that on the day of the murders she had gone to Roger's home after finishing her shift at work. When she arrived at the trailer, present were Roger, his father, and a friend of Roger known as Joker. She told Detective Springer that she had intercourse with Roger and then took a nap in his bedroom from approximately 9:30 to 10:20 p.m. When she awoke, Roger, his father, and Joker were still in the trailer. She left shortly thereafter to return home before her midnight curfew. She admitted that she was under the influence of drugs that night but did not provide exact details. Ms. Kuria repeatedly stated that she did not know anything about the murders and had not overheard anything being discussed in that regard.

Detective Springer indicated many times throughout the course of the forty-minute interview that, although he sympathized with the difficult position Ms. Kuria was in, he believed that she was lying and told her that he had "good information" that she knew something about the case. Detective Springer repeatedly stated that he did not believe that she was involved in the murders and she was not yet in any trouble, but warned her that lying to the police was a crime:

I'm not trying to come across as threatening, but when you lie to the police, that's a crime. You can't ... lie to the police. Because if it's a provable lie that we know that you're lying, that can be a problem ... for you obviously. And you have a job. You know, you have a baby on the way, probably, possibly. There are things that are important for you to consider. ... So I'm trying to stress to you that the better route to go is to be truthful, and then we can work with that. ... You see what I'm saying? I can't impress that upon you enough.

Detective Springer indicated that he thought Ms. Kuria was lying in order to protect Roger, in part because she may have been pregnant at the time, but that by doing so she was creating a problem for herself down the road. Detective Springer also stated that it was a "pivotal moment" for her and suggested that she take a polygraph examination. At this point in the interview Ms. Kuria became visibly distressed.

She declined Detective Springer's request to take a polygraph exam and asked to speak with a lawyer.

Detective Springer then explained to Ms. Kuria that she was not under arrest, but she could be brought before a grand jury where thirty people would ask her questions about what she witnessed on the night of the murders. He said that she would not be allowed to have a lawyer in the room and if she lied to the grand jury she could be charged with perjury. Detective Springer stated that there was already an outstanding subpoena for her to testify before a grand jury, but that he had declined to serve it on her because he wanted a chance to interview her one-on-one instead. He told her that based on the information that the State's attorney had, and the fact that she was not disclosing what he believed she actually knew about the night of the murders, the prosecutor was likely going to reissue the subpoena.

At the end of the interview, Detective Springer asked Ms. Kuria if she had ever seen any guns in Roger's trailer; she responded that she had not. Finally, Detective Springer asked her if she knew Petitioner. She replied that she had "seen him before," but did not know him well.

The Undisclosed Interview with the Bells

On October 10, 2017, more than three months after Ms. Kuria's first contact with the police, Detective Springer and Detective Gwynn went to the home of Ms. Kuria's mother and stepfather, Mr. and Mrs. Bell, attempting to locate Ms. Kuria. The detectives spoke with the Bells in a recorded interview. Detective Springer stated that he thought the Bells had "spoken with the police before about this issue with like [Ms. Kuria] had a boyfriend [i.e., Roger Garcia] a little while ago," which Mrs. Bell confirmed.² When the detectives asked the Bells about Ms. Kuria's current living situation, Mrs. Bell indicated that Ms. Kuria had moved out of Roger's trailer, and that she may have been staying with a prior boyfriend named Mitchell at the time.

Mrs. Bell explained to the detectives that she had met with Ms. Kuria a few days prior and that she had seemed depressed and had stopped taking her medication. Mrs. Bell also told the detectives that the week before, Mitchell called her "and said Vicki was trying to kill herself or something like that. She wanted to throw herself out the window." The detectives indicated that they would try to follow up with Mitchell and confirmed with Mrs. Bell that they had the correct phone number for Ms. Kuria. The detectives also inquired about Ms. Kuria's friends and whether the Bells "had ever heard the name Ashley Foogle ... [b]ecause [they] were told she might have a friend with that name." Mr. Bell responded that he had not.³

When Detective Springer stated that they were investigating the murders of Shadi Najjar and Artem Ziberov, Mr. Bell said: "[Vicki] knows about that, she knows about that. She said she knew who did it ...." Mr. Bell then asked Mrs. Bell if she remembered Ms. Kuria saying that. Mrs. Bell replied: "No, Vicki ... said she didn't know" who committed the murders. Detective Springer explained that he believed Ms. Kuria had lied to him in her first interview and that she knew more than she had previously disclosed because "she felt allegiance to [Roger] and wanted to protect him." Detective Springer stated that "when you have information in a case and you lie to the police about it, that can turn into a crime for you." He said that based on the other evidence in the case,...