Carrero-Vasquez v. State
210 Md. App. 504
| Md. Ct. Spec. App. | 2013Background
- Appellant Carrero-Vasquez was arrested after a traffic stop for speeding and skidding and could not produce a valid license.
- During the stop, he provided an ID from Mexico; officers later learned he used names to conceal his identity.
- Police searched him and found an El Salvadoran ID in his wallet, a Social Security card, and $2,474 in cash.
- A bag in his right pocket contained small bags with cocaine or a cutting agent; a stolen revolver was found in the car's center console.
- He was indicted on possession with intent to distribute cocaine, weapon offenses, and traffic offenses; first trial convictions were vacated by this Court for unrelated reasons.
- On remand, he was retried and convicted on all charges except sale/transfer of a stolen firearm and sentenced to 15 years; this appeal followed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Prosecutor’s closing-Gut decision allowed; improper burden misstatement | Carrero-Vasquez argues the “gut says guilty” remark violated due process. | State contends the remark explained credibility assessment. | Reversed for error; remark improper and prejudicial. |
| Cross-examining a key witness about immigration status | Carrero-Vasquez contends Luna’s immigration status evidence was a valid bias line of inquiry. | State argues immigration status is collateral and should be limited. | Reversed; deprivation of confrontation rights. |
| Anti-CSI instruction given pre-closing | Carrero-Vasquez asserts the instruction was non-neutral and prejudicial. | State maintains preservation and no reversible error. | Reversed; anti-CSI instruction improper. |
Key Cases Cited
- Davis v. Alaska, 415 U.S. 308 (U.S. 1974) (confrontation and cross-examination within Sixth Amendment core)
- Olden v. Kentucky, 488 U.S. 227 (U.S. 1988) (cross-examination of motive to testify falsely; confrontation)
- Calloway v. State, 414 Md. 616 (Md. 2010) (motive to testify; relevant cross-examination under Rule 5-616(a)(4))
- Martinez v. State, 416 Md. 418 (Md. 2010) (motive to testify; confrontation right violation when probing bias)
- Evans v. State, 174 Md.App. 549 (Md. 2007) (instruction on evidence and forensic testimony; preservation/harmless error considerations)
- Atkins v. State, 421 Md. 434 (Md. 2011) (anti-CSI instruction addressed; curative vs. improper)
- Stabb v. State, 423 Md. 454 (Md. 2011) (anti-CSI instruction; curative guidance)
- Sivells v. State, 196 Md.App. 254 (Md. 2010) (standard for improper closing argument harmless-error review)
- Lee v. State, 405 Md. 148 (Md. 2008) (harmless-error factors in closing arguments)