United States v. Batista
2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 13395
| 2d Cir. | 2012Background
- Batista and Alcantara were indicted in 2007–2008 for membership in a Bushwick narcotics ring led by Virgilio Hiciano; Alcantara was a major supplier and Batista provided information and access to NYPD data.
- Batista was an NYPD detective who warned Hiciano of police activity and accessed internal NYPD databases, facilitating the drug operation.
- Wiretap authority under Title III was obtained in late 2006; Batista moved to suppress the wiretap evidence, but the district court denied.
- Alcantara cooperated with investigators, admitted supplying significant cocaine quantities, and testified against Batista; trial established extensive involvement.
- Trial resulted in Batista’s conviction on all counts and a $25,000 fine, with Alcantara pleading guilty earlier and receiving a 120-month sentence after cooperation.
- On appeal, both convictions and sentences were affirmed, with review focusing on juror conduct, translation, sentencing enhancements, and related issues.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for conspiracy conviction | Batista | Batista claims insufficient evidence | No reversible error; evidence sufficient |
| Prosecutorial misconduct in closing arguments | Batista | Batista argues misconduct tainted trial | Not egregious; curative instructions adequate |
| Firearm possession and obstruction enhancements; leader role | Batista | Challenges enhancements | Enhancements upheld as proper; harmless error if any |
| Sleeping juror due process concern | Batista | Juror slept during trial | No plain error; not reversible |
| Waiver/plain error on Court Interpreters Act and Franks/wiretapping issues | Batista | Waiver; translation procedure; suppression | Waiver; no plain error; district court proper in translation procedure |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Diaz, 176 F.3d 52 (2d Cir. 1999) (standard for reviewing alleged juror misconduct)
- United States v. Panebianco, 543 F.2d 447 (2d Cir. 1976) (abuse-of-discretion review for juror issues)
- United States v. Simels, 654 F.3d 161 (2d Cir. 2011) (plain-error review where defense failed to object timely)
- United States v. Viola, 35 F.3d 37 (1st Cir. 1994) (propriety of trial conduct and strategic objections)
- United States v. Elias, 285 F.3d 183 (2d Cir. 2002) (standard for evaluating prosecutorial misconduct on appeal)
- United States v. Locascio, 6 F.3d 924 (2d Cir. 1993) (egregious misconduct standard to overturn a verdict)
- United States v. Jass, 569 F.3d 47 (2d Cir. 2009) (harmless-error approach to sentencing or trial errors)
- United States v. Cavera, 550 F.3d 180 (2d Cir. 2008) (en banc; harmless-error framework)
- United States v. Soto, 959 F.2d 1181 (2d Cir. 1992) (application of § 2D1.1 firearm enhancement across conspirators)
- United States v. Patasnik, 89 F.3d 63 (2d Cir. 1996) (foundational requirements for applying § 3B1.1 enhancements)
- Zafiro v. United States, 506 U.S. 534 (1993) (presumption that jury follows court's instructions)
- Franks v. Delaware, 438 U.S. 154 (1978) (Franks hearing standard for falsity in affidavits)