United States v. Gramajo, 565 F. App'x 723

Gramajo was convicted of felon in possession of a firearm and possession of a stolen firearm under 18 U.S.C. § 922(g)(1) and (j).
Police investigated a burglary at Rudolfo Diaz’s mobile home; Diaz inventory included a gun safe with firearms and other items reported missing.
Gramajo was identified in a photo lineup as the man selling tools from a white pickup; officers later found items from the burglary at Perez’s mobile home, Gramajo’s former girlfriend.
A Mossberg rifle magazine, ammunition, and Gramajo-related papers were found; Diaz later acknowledged some items were his, including ownership of the Mossberg rifle’s not-stolen status.
During trial, Gramajo’s siblings testified about December 2011–January 2012 living arrangements; the government elicited rebuttal testimony from Detective Johnson about Gramajo’s statements, which the defense sought to limit under Rule 106.
The jury convicted on counts 1 and 3, acquitted count 2; Gramajo received a 110-month sentence.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Prosecutorial misconduct from hearsay question	Question improperly invited hearsay that could affect credibility.	Unanswered question, curative instruction; no harm; fair trial preserved.	No abuse; one unanswered question with curative instruction does not deny fairness.
Admission of rebuttal testimony under Rule 106	Partial admission violated completeness; broader statement should have been admitted.	Statement relevant to contradict inference; proper rebuttal.	No abuse; exclusion of some portions did not mislead; rule 106 not violated.
Allen-type instruction	Instruction coerced jurors toward verdict.	Instruction appropriately encouraged continued deliberation.	Not coercive; instruction consistent with precedent; did not compel verdict.
Opportunity to cross-examine and confrontation concerns	Cross-examination was improperly restricted; violated rights.	Trial court appropriately balanced evidentiary and confrontation considerations.	No plain error; court did not err in cross-examination handling.

United States v. Serrato, 742 F.3d 461 (10th Cir. 2014) (review of mistrial denial for abuse of discretion; fair-trial focus)
United States v. Gabaldon, 91 F.3d 91 (10th Cir. 1996) (unanswered questions and regard for jury instructions)
United States v. Small, 423 F.3d 1164 (10th Cir. 2005) (guide on assessment of jury instructions impact)
United States v. Talk, 13 F.3d 369 (10th Cir. 1993) (rebuttal evidence; abuse of discretion standard)
United States v. Loya-Medina, 596 F.3d 716 (10th Cir. 2010) (Rule 106 application to non-writing testimony)
Allen v. United States, 164 U.S. 492 (1896) (support for permissibility of supplemental instruction)
United States v. Cornelius, 696 F.3d 1307 (10th Cir. 2012) (Allen-type instruction analysis factors)
United States v. Patterson, 713 F.3d 1237 (10th Cir. 2013) (verdict-deliberation guidance and coercion considerations)
United States v. Rogers, 556 F.3d 1130 (10th Cir. 2009) (cumulative error limitations)