628 F. App'x 36
2d Cir.2015Background
- Victor Barcelo was convicted by a jury in the SDNY for conspiring to distribute cocaine and appeals the conviction.
- Barcelo contends the government failed to disclose statements by cooperating witness Eric Arellano that conflicted with DEA agents’ testimony about a traffic stop, raising Brady and suppression-hearing issues.
- Arellano testified at trial; his account differed from the agents’ account but was not disclosed before the suppression hearing and was only revealed to defense counsel during a pretrial preparation session.
- Barcelo moved for a mistrial, a new trial, and reopening of the suppression hearing based on alleged Brady violations and, pro se, argued the conviction rested on perjured agent testimony.
- The district court denied relief; the Second Circuit reviewed the denials for abuse of discretion and affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Brady disclosure at suppression hearing | Government suppressed Arellano’s conflicting account, which was favorable and material | Government lacked actual or constructive possession of Arellano’s account pre-hearing; no suppression occurred | No Brady violation: Arellano was not part of prosecution team and defendant knew essential facts; district court not clearly erroneous |
| Brady disclosure at trial (late disclosure) | Late disclosure deprived Barcelo of using Arellano in opening and initial cross-exam | Arellano was disclosed before trial testimony, defense re-opened cross-examination and used his testimony to impeach agents | No prejudice shown; no reasonable probability of different outcome; no Brady violation |
| Perjured testimony claim | Trial conviction relied on perjured testimony by DEA agents | Inconsistencies were cross-examined; differences in recollection do not prove perjury | Denied: defendant failed to prove perjury, materiality, government knowledge, and nondisclosure; credibility issues for jury |
Key Cases Cited
- Strickler v. Greene, 527 U.S. 263 (establishes Brady materiality and prejudice framework)
- Kyles v. Whitley, 514 U.S. 419 (discusses prosecutor’s duty to learn of favorable evidence and materiality standard)
- United States v. Stewart, 433 F.3d 273 (defines prosecution team and constructive knowledge inquiry)
- Leka v. Portuondo, 257 F.3d 89 (outlines Brady elements)
- DiSimone v. Phillips, 461 F.3d 181 (explains when evidence is considered suppressed)