Javier Vasquez-Velasco v. United States, 21-71430

Javier Vasquez-Velasco was convicted in 1990 for aiding and abetting two murders in furtherance of racketeering, as part of the Guadalajara Narcotics Cartel's retaliation against the DEA.
The convictions stemmed from the 1985 La Langosta restaurant murders in Mexico, distinct from but tried with the murder of DEA Agent Enrique Camarena.
Vasquez previously filed three § 2255 petitions (1997, 2014, 2016), making the present motion subject to the strict requirements for successive petitions under 28 U.S.C. § 2255(h).
He based his request for leave to file another petition on alleged newly discovered evidence, including a DEA agent's memoir and a documentary series casting doubt on trial witness credibility.
The district court denied authorization for a successive petition, finding the new evidence insufficient to establish Vasquez’s actual innocence under the statute.

Issue	Vasquez's Argument	Government's Argument	Held
Whether new evidence is sufficient to authorize a successive § 2255 petition under § 2255(h)(1)	Memoir/documentary show alternative motives for murders and impeach witness credibility, undermining his convictions	New evidence does not exonerate Vasquez or undermine core trial evidence; does not meet § 2255(h)(1) standard	Authorization denied; new evidence not sufficient to meet statutory standard
Whether new evidence would have changed trial court’s jurisdiction/severance rulings	If new evidence was known in 1990, court would have ruled differently on extraterritorial jurisdiction/severance	Memoir’s allegations do not address evidence of Vasquez’s guilt or the racketeering purpose	New evidence does not affect the basis for jurisdiction or severance; claim rejected
Whether recantations or documentary evidence undermine witness testimony sufficiently	Witness recantations and inconsistent accounts purportedly show actual innocence	Cervantes reaffirmed trial testimony; recantations viewed with suspicion; other witnesses not impeached	New evidence does not clearly disprove trial testimony or establish innocence
Whether Vasquez has made a prima facie showing of actual innocence	Combination of new materials shows reasonable doubt in light of the whole record	Jury could have credited trial evidence; new materials not clear and convincing	Vasquez has not made requisite showing for actual innocence under § 2255(h)(1)

United States v. Washington, 653 F.3d 1057 (9th Cir. 2011) (explains standards for successive § 2255 motions)
United States v. Buenrostro, 638 F.3d 720 (9th Cir. 2011) (claims ripe at time of first § 2255 considered successive in later petitions)
United States v. Vasquez-Velasco, 15 F.3d 833 (9th Cir. 1994) (retaliatory motive sufficient for extraterritorial jurisdiction)
Gable v. Williams, 49 F.4th 1315 (9th Cir. 2022) (recantations are generally viewed with suspicion)