382 P.3d 963
N.M. Ct. App.2016Background
- Defendant Matias Loza was tried for racketeering and conspiracy to commit racketeering arising from his association with the "AZ Boys," an enterprise whose core activity was methamphetamine distribution.
- During the investigation, police found a burned vehicle containing a homicide victim; evidence linked the vehicle to the AZ Boys and connected Loza to the scene.
- Loza was also implicated in separate criminal proceedings for murder, arson, and bribery; the State sought to introduce evidence of those acts at the racketeering trial.
- The State introduced an audio recording recovered from Loza’s phone in which speakers discuss disposing of a body by "torching" a car; Detective Fabian Picazo identified four voices on the recording (including Loza) and a transcript identifying speakers was admitted over objection.
- Loza was convicted of racketeering and conspiracy; on appeal he argued (1) improper admission of evidence of uncharged/other acts under Rule 11-404(B) and (2) insufficient foundation for voice identification under Rule 11-901(B)(5).
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Admissibility of evidence of murder, arson, bribery at racketeering trial (Rule 11-404(B)) | State: predicate offenses (murder, arson, bribery) are intrinsic to racketeering charges and thus admissible; Rule 11-404(B) is inapplicable | Loza: evidence of other crimes was propensity evidence and should be excluded under Rule 11-404(B) | Court: Rule 11-404(B) does not apply because predicate offenses are intrinsic to racketeering; admission was not an abuse of discretion |
| Foundation for voice identification of speakers on audio and transcript (Rule 11-901(B)(5)) | State: Detective Picazo had sufficient familiarity—multiple in-person conversations and monitoring of numerous phone calls—to identify voices; minimal showing suffices | Loza: detective lacked sufficient familiarity and could not identify all speakers consistently, so transcript and identifications were unreliable | Court: Picazo met the low threshold of familiarity; partial inability to ID segments affects weight, not admissibility; admission was not an abuse of discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Parker, 553 F.3d 1309 (10th Cir. 2009) (acts intrinsic to charged offense are not subject to Rule 404(b) limits)
- United States v. Green, 617 F.3d 233 (3d Cir. 2010) (uncharged misconduct that directly proves the charged offense is not "other" crime evidence)
- United States v. Smith, 635 F.2d 716 (8th Cir. 1980) (minimal familiarity with a voice can suffice for admissible identification)