871 F. Supp. 2d 1125
D.N.M.2012Background
- Harmon charged with cocaine and marijuana offenses; pled guilty to Count I under a Plea Agreement demanding a 60-month sentence.
- MOO denied Harmon’s Motion to Suppress on June 6, 2011; suppression based on Lucero’s stop found objectively reasonable under the Fourth Amendment.
- Harmon obtained impeachment material from United States v. Sheridan (transcript) alleging potential credibility issues with Lucero; government did not initially disclose this evidence.
- Harmon sought reconsideration, withdrawal of plea, and reopening suppression; March 9, 2012 hearing held.
- Court concluded Sheridan evidence lacks impeachment or exculpatory value, Brady obligation did not apply before suppression or plea, Rule 16 disclosure not triggered, and Harmon may not withdraw his guilty plea.
- Court denied all three motions and reaffirmed denial of suppression; no reopening of suppression hearing or withdrawal of plea based on the new material.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Reconsideration of suppression ruling based on new impeachment evidence | Harmon argues Sheridan transcript impeaches Lucero’s credibility | United States contends evidence is not impeachment and not material | Denied: no basis to reopen suppression or reconsider MOO |
| Brady disclosure before suppression hearing | Prosecution failed to disclose impeachment material prior to suppression | No Brady obligation before suppression/plea; evidence not material | Denied: Brady did not require pre-hearing disclosure; not material |
| Withdrawal of guilty plea based on Sheridan evidence | New impeachment evidence justifies withdrawal | Factors do not support withdrawal; plea knowing and voluntary | Denied: seven-factor test weighs against withdrawal; plea stands |
| Rule 16 disclosure requirement for Sheridan evidence | Rule 16 compelled disclosure of related impeachment material | Rule 16 not triggered; evidence not material to defense | Denied: Rule 16 did not require disclosure; evidence not material |
Key Cases Cited
- Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (U.S. 1963) (due process requires disclosure of material exculpatory or impeachment information)
- Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (U.S. 1972) (impeachment evidence admissible to attack credibility of government witnesses)
- United States v. Ruiz, 536 U.S. 622 (U.S. 2002) (impeachment information need not be disclosed before guilty plea)
- Cone v. Bell, 556 U.S. 449 (U.S. 2009) (favorable evidence is material if it undermines confidence in verdict)
- Kyles v. Whitley, 514 U.S. 419 (U.S. 1995) (prosecution has affirmative duty to disclose favorable evidence)