United States v. Cuadrado (Cedeño)
2011 U.S. App. LEXIS 9016
| 2d Cir. | 2011Background
- Cedeño was convicted in SDNY of kidnapping, armed robbery, and related offenses; sentenced to 319 months' imprisonment.
- Before trial, government moved in limine to preclude cross-examination of Detective Goldrick about a state-court credibility finding.
- New York Appellate Division in 1990 found Goldrick had lied and tailored his testimony in a suppression hearing (People v. Miret-Gonzalez).
- The district court granted the motion in limine, stating the finding addressed only the specific case, not Goldrick's general veracity.
- The district court allowed a co-defendant to cross-examine Goldrick on the credibility finding at a pretrial suppression hearing.
- Cedeño was tried and convicted; this appeal challenges the limitation on cross-examination as erroneous but ultimately harmless.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the limitation on cross-examining about the credibility finding was error | Cedeño contends it violated Rule 608(b) and confrontation rights | Government argues Cruz controls and limits such cross-examination | Error, but harmless; no reversal required |
| Whether Cruz's two-factor approach was the exclusive test for admissibility | Cedeño argues broader factors should be considered | Government maintains Cruz limits are sufficient | Not exclusive; other factors may be relevant |
| Whether the district court's error was harmless beyond a reasonable doubt | Error affected jury's assessment of Goldrick's credibility | Other witnesses corroborated Goldrick; impact limited | Harmless error; conviction affirmed |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Cruz, 894 F.2d 41 (2d Cir. 1990) (limits of using prior credibility findings; context-specific inquiry)
- United States v. Terry, 702 F.2d 299 (2d Cir. 1983) (prior criticized testimony probative of weight)
- United States v. Whitmore, 359 F.3d 609 (D.C. Cir. 2004) (prior lies under oath prove untruthfulness)
- United States v. Dawson, 434 F.3d 956 (7th Cir. 2006) (considering motive and credibility of prior lies)
- United States v. Paulino, 445 F.3d 211 (2d Cir. 2006) (harmless-error review in cross-examination)
- United States v. Van Arsdall, 475 U.S. 673 (1986) (harmless-error standard for evidentiary rulings)
- United States v. Weiss, 930 F.2d 185 (2d Cir. 1991) (wide latitude to cross-examination of witnesses)
- Hynes v. Coughlin, 79 F.3d 285 (2d Cir. 1996) (considerations for probative value of prior conduct)
- United States v. Schatzle, 901 F.2d 252 (2d Cir. 1990) (prior conduct evidence relevance to truthfulness)