United States v. Aaron Hernandez
2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 16494
5th Cir.2012Background
- Hernandez convicted of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute 500 grams or more of cocaine and aiding and abetting the theft of $17,000; sentences were concurrent 120 months.
- FBI informant Guerra provided information that Hernandez was selling cocaine and arranged meetings at Hernandez’s residence.
- Guerra’s meetings with Daniel Hernandez led to $17,000 being handed over; Daniel fled with the money and did not deliver cocaine.
- Indictment charged Hernandez, his wife Carrillo, Daniel, and another, with conspiracy and theft of government money.
- Gonzalez previously represented Daniel in an unrelated state case; District Court reviewed potential conflict and initially ordered Gonzalez to withdraw Carrillo’s representation.
- The Government moved to disqualify Gonzalez due to potential conflict; Garcia hearing not conducted; Daniel did not testify; Hernandez convicted on both counts, PSR calculated offense levels, and sentence imposed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Conflict of interest—Garcia hearing required? | Hernandez argues conflict existed and Garcia hearing needed. | Hernandez contends actual conflict, not hypothetical, requiring Garcia hearing. | No actual conflict; Garcia hearing not required. |
| Whether Gonzalez’s prior representation created an actual conflict | Hernandez asserts nontermination of prior representation created conflict. | Gonzalez represented Daniel briefly; no confidential info used; no ongoing duty. | Conflict remained hypothetical; no Garcia hearing. |
| Plain-error in multi-count adjustment under § 3D1.4 | Hernandez challenges 1-point adjustment, claiming error and higher sentence. | Government concedes error; ranges overlapped; potential but unproven impact on sentence. | Misapplication was plain error; remand for resentencing justified. |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Garcia-Jasso, 472 F.3d 239 (5th Cir. 2006) (conflict of interest; Garcia hearing when actual conflict exists)
- United States v. Burns, 526 F.3d 852 (5th Cir. 2008) (conflict of interest; factors for disqualification remain fact-dependent)
- United States v. Infante, 404 F.3d 376 (5th Cir. 2005) (factors for determining real conflict; time and termination of prior representation)
- Perillo v. Johnson, 205 F.3d 775 (5th Cir. 2000) (multi-representation conflicts depend on loyalty/divided interests)
- United States v. Villegas, 404 F.3d 355 (5th Cir. 2005) (multi-count adjustments; nine levels rule; related standard)
- United States v. John, 597 F.3d 263 (5th Cir. 2010) (overlap of ranges; guidance on when miscalculation affects rights)