United States v. Matta-Quinones

1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. LUIS MATTA-QUINONES, Defendant.

CRIMINAL No. 21-160 (FAB)

United States District Court, D. Puerto Rico

January 19, 2023

OPINION AND ORDER

FRANCISCO A. BESOSA SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Before the Court is defendant Luis Matta-Quinones (“Matta”)'s motion for a judgment of acquittal pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 29 (“Rule 29”). (Docket No. 148.) Matta also moves for a new trial pursuant to Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 33 (“Rule 33”). (Docket No. 159.) For the reasons set forth below, both motions are DENIED.

I. Background

On May 6, 2021, a grand jury charged Matta with possession of a firearm and ammunition by a prohibited person in violation of 18 U.S.C. section 922(g) (count one), and possession of a machinegun in violation of 18 U.S.C. section 922(o) (count two). (Docket No. 1.)

Puerto Rico Police Department officers Eduardo Vidal-Santiago (“Vidal”), Ivan Marrero-Lopez (“Marrero”), and Angel Cruz-Soto (“Cruz”) testified at trial. (Docket Nos. 135 and 136.) Their testimony established that on April 27, 2021, Matta possessed two loaded Glock pistols, several pistol magazines, and an assortment of .40 caliber, 9 mm, and 7.62 mm ammunition. (Docket No. 135 at pp. 32-33.) After a three-day trial, the jury returned a guilty verdict as to both counts. (Docket No. 143.)

II. Matta's Motion for a New Trial

Jury deliberations commenced on October 19, 2022. (Docket No. 140.) According to Matta, the Court committed structural error by permitting “the government's case agent to be present with the jury while inspecting the evidence.” (Docket No. 159 at p. 6.) This Court subsequently received the following note: “May all the physical evidence be brought to the deliberating room?” (Docket No. 156 at p. 3.) The parties and the Court reconvened to address this request, stating:^[1]

Court: My position is that all the physical evidence can be brought to the deliberating room except for the weapons and the ammunition. If they want to take a look at it, they can come to the courtroom and take a look at it in the presence of the agent.

Defense Counsel Mora: Your Honor, our only objection as to your ruling is that if the jury, with your authorization, can be able - it was part of our, basically, theory of the case and my closing argument, if the Court can allow them to carry the ammunition in the presence, obviously, of the agent or of the [Court Security Officer, “CSO”]. But that would be our request. That's essential for the defense.

Court: Government? I guess what Mr. Mora wants is that the jury be able to handle the weapons - the ammunition, I guess, in the bag.

Defense Counsel: In the bag, Your Honor. There is no need for them to take it out. . . .

AUSA Casablanca: Your Honor, the position of the Government is, obviously, the jury can take a look at all of the evidence, but again, it's up to them what they want to do with the evidence.

Court: No, but if they want to take a - to handle the firearm -

AUSA Casablanca: I understand.

Court: - and take a look at the firearms - because there's an issue as to whether the firearms - whether the defendant knew that they were machine guns. So the jury may want to take a look at the firearm to make its own decision as to that. . . .

Court: So let me start writing down. Okay. So let me write something out here. Okay. As far as that question: “The physical evidence may be brought into the deliberating room except for the firearms and the ammunition. The jury may view and handle the ammunition in the courtroom with the case agent present.” Is that okay?

Defense Counsel Mora: No, Your Honor. We object as to that because I do - our request would be for the firearms and ammunition to be brought to the deliberating room.

Court: Denied. No, no. No way. No way, because the case agent has to be present when they view and handle the firearms. The agent cannot say a word.

Defense Counsel Mora: That would be -

Court: He has to be present.

Defense Counsel Mora: Okay. But -

Defense Counsel Rios: Who else - is it just going to be the CSO and the case agent?

Court: The CSO, the Marshal, and the agent. That's it. Everybody else has to leave the courtroom.

Defense Counsel Mora: Yes, of course. Okay. That was going to be our second request.

Court: Okay. All right. That takes care of that.

. . .

Defense Counsel Mora: Regarding the jury note number one, my question is whether the Court will allow, as it was their request - since they are only allowed to see the ammunition and firearms here in the courtroom in the presence of the case agent, can they also bring, as it

Court: They can bring what?

Defense Counsel Mora: Can they also bring, if they want to, for example, Exhibit Number 1, which is the feedbag?

Court: Well, the feedbag they are going to have inside.

Defense Counsel Mora: Exactly.

Defense Counsel Rios: Yes, Your Honor, but what we are asking the Court is to allow them, if they so wish to, to bring the feedbag into the courtroom, and if they want to do the exercise of putting the firearms -

Court: They didn't ask for that.

Defense Counsel Rios: I know, but if -

Court: No, they didn't ask.

Defense Counsel Mora: They asked to see all the evidence.

Defense Counsel Rios: Our -

Court: No. They said, Can the evidence be brought into the jury room?

Defense Counsel Mora: Exactly.

Court: I said, Yes, except for the firearm and the ammunition.

Defense Counsel Mora: So the evidence will be separated, Your Honor, and that was not their request. So if they choose to bring the feedbag, because that's - precisely has been our whole issue during trial, they should be allowed to.

Defense Counsel Rios: We are not asking the Court to tell them to do it, but we are asking the Court to allow them, if they so wish to request that, to do it; if they want to bring the feedbag.

Court: Government?

AUSA Casablanca: If they so wish and they ask specifically for it, we don't have any objection, but it has to come from them.

Defense Counsel Rios: That's all we are asking.

Court: But I am not going to say that. I am just going to say -

Defense Counsel Mora: What is written.

Court: - what I already said. If they want to have someone go out to the jury room and bring the feedbag, they can do that.

Defense Counsel Rios: And that's what we are asking.

Court: But I am not going to put it in my answer because that's not what the question is.

Defense Counsel Mora: Yes, we understand.

Defense Counsel Rios: That's all we are asking the Court, is to - so the CSO and the Marshal are aware that they can do that if that's what they want to do.

Court: I am going to add, “In the presence of the court security officer, the Deputy United States Marshal, and the case agent.” Is that okay?

Defense Counsel Mora: Yes.

AUSA Russell: That's fine, Your Honor.

Court: So it starts, “I have discussed your questions with the attorneys, and all agree on the following responses: “The physical evidence may be bought into the jury room except for the firearms and ammunition. The jury may review and handle the firearms and the ammunition in the courtroom, in the presence of the court security officer, the Deputy United States Marshal, and the case agent.” . . . Any problem with that?

Defense Counsel Mora: No objection.

AUSA Russell: That's fine with the Government, Your Honor.

. . .

AUSA Casablanca: Yes. Since the Court mentioned that the firearms and ammunition, that the jury had to come here for them, and there is going to be the special agent present, is there any specific instruction you may want to give to the special agent?

Court: Only to keep his mouth shut.

Agent Giovanetti: Yes, Your Honor.

Court: You know, if they jury wants to handle it, it can handle it, but don't explain what the firearm is. Don't point to any part of the firearm. Just let the jury -you know, if they want to take a look at it, that's fine. That's all.

Defense Counsel Rios: Your Honor, may we suggest or ask the Court to give - to make the jury feel more comfortable while doing that, can they just sit in the first bench instead of right in front of where they are going to be working, so they can feel more comfortable handling -

Court: Whatever they want to do.

Defense Counsel Rios: I am asking the agent to sit in the first bench instead of at the table right where they are going to handle the evidence. We don't want the jury to feel uncomfortable.

Court: The agent is going to have to give the weapon to

Defense Counsel Rios: He can place it on the table, Your Honor.

Court: Look, don't make a federal case out of it.

Defense Counsel Rios: It actually is, Your Honor.

Court: The agent is going to have to give the weapon to the jury and will have to stand near the weapon while it's being handled.

Defense Counsel Rios: We understand, Your Honor; we just-

Court: So that's it.

(Docket No. 156 at pp. 3-13) (emphasis added). The jury then examined the firearms and ammunition inside the courtroom with Agent Giovanetti, the CSO and the Marshal.

A. Rule 33 Legal Standard

The Court “may vacate any judgment and grant a new trial if the interest of justice so requires.” Fed. R. Crim. P 33(a). Rule 33 motions are “sparingly” granted and only when “a miscarriage of justice would otherwise result.” Fed. R. Crim. P. 33(b); United States v. Del-Valle, 566 F.3d 31, 38 (1st Cir. 2009) (internal citation and quotation marks omitted). Disposition of Matta's motion for a new trial is “committed to the sound discretion of the district court.” United States v. Wright, 937 F.3d 8, 34 n.5 (1st Cir. 2019) (citation omitted). This Court possesses “greater latitude in considering a motion for a new trial than it does in considering a motion for acquittal.” United States v. Merlino, 592 F.3d 22, 33 (1st Cir. 201...