United States v. Barraza, 655 F.3d 375

Barraza, an elected Texas state judge, sought money and sexual favors from a defendant’s family in exchange for judicial assistance.
FBI undercover operation with Sarait and an agent led to meetings in January 2009 and a $1,300 payment.
A transfer order to Barraza’s courtroom was attempted but blocked; Barraza continued solicitations, later receiving an additional $3,800.
Barraza was indicted August 12, 2009, on two counts of wire fraud, one count of mail fraud, and honest services fraud, plus a false statement.
A jury convicted Barraza on two wire fraud counts, one honest services count, and one false statement; he was sentenced to 60 months.
On appeal, Barraza challenged juror misconduct, Brady material, extraneous testimony, Skilling-based theories, evidence sufficiency, and sentencing computations.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Juror-misconduct inquiry if prejudicial	Barraza contends juror remarks required a mistrial.	Barraza argues the district court erred in not granting a new trial.	No abuse; statements admissible only for non-material deliberations; verdict affirmed.
Brady impeachment material withheld	Sarait’s inconsistent statements were Brady material.	Failure to disclose impacted trial strategy and outcome.	No Brady violation; impeachment did not prejudice result.
Extraneous information by witness	Testimony should have compelled a new trial due to prejudice.	Curative instruction sufficient to neutralize prejudice.	No abuse of discretion; curative instruction deemed adequate.
Skilling-based error harmlessness	Honest-services-indictment theory valid; Skilling changes applicability.	Invalid theory could mislead the jury.	Harmless beyond reasonable doubt; conviction cohesive with valid theory.
Sufficiency of Count One wire fraud evidence	Email to Rita reflects money/sex scheme; supports wire fraud.	Email relates to sex; not money, thus insuff.	Sufficient evidence; bribery/honest services theory supports Count One.

United States v. Bishop, 264 F.3d 535 (5th Cir. 2001) (abuse of discretion standard for new trial motions)
United States v. McKinney, 429 F.2d 1019 (5th Cir. 1970) (jury-deliberations Rule 606 framework authority)
United States v. Duzac, 622 F.2d 911 (5th Cir. 1980) (personal prejudices not affecting verdict; no remand)
United States v. Cathey, 259 F.3d 365 (5th Cir. 2001) (evidentiary rulings and harmless error considerations)
United States v. Skilling, 638 F.3d 480 (5th Cir. 2011) (holding on honest-services and plain-error review context)
Schmuck v. United States, 489 U.S. 705 (Supreme Court 1989) (test for whether mailings were part of a scheme)
Powell v. Quarterman, 536 F.3d 325 (5th Cir. 2008) (standard for materiality in Brady and related rulings)
United States v. Woods, 907 F.2d 1540 (5th Cir. 1990) (consideration of acts for sentencing guidelines)