453 F. App'x 544
5th Cir.2011Background
- Defendants Ahedo, Navajar, and Garcia were indicted for conspiracy to commit racketeering under RICO and were convicted by a jury.
- The Texas Mexican Mafia (TMM) is described as a structured crime group involved in drug trafficking and extortion, collecting taxes on dealers and sometimes killing non-payers.
- Indicted acts include murder, solicitation of murder, attempted murder, extortion, and narcotics distribution.
- Appellants challenge four trial rulings: juror dismissal, admission of extrinsic evidence, vehicle-search evidence, and witness bolstering.
- The panel affirms the convictions after reviewing each claimed error for harm and decides no reversible error occurred.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Juror removal after trial began | Navajar argues the removal was improper | Navajar contends removal lacked factual basis | No plain error; district court acted on impairment concerns and replacement did not prejudice |
| Admission of Guajardo murder evidence (Rule 404(b) and 403) | Garcia argues unindicted, prejudicial extrinsic evidence | Government may show uncharged acts within same enterprise to prove conspiracy | Not error; evidence connected to TMM conduct and harmless beyond reasonable doubt |
| Seized vehicle evidence under Gant | Ahedo and Navajar challenge searches as unlawful under Gant | Searches were justified by good faith and prior law | Harmless error; authorities reasonably believed searches were lawful given pre-Gant law |
| Bolstering of informant witnesses by agent Carlisle | Garcia claims improper bolstering | Exchange described investigation methodology, not credibility of a specific witness | No reversible error; testimony did not bolster a particular witness's credibility |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Bilecki, 876 F.2d 1128 (5th Cir. 1989) (plain error review standard for juror dismissal challenges)
- United States v. Olano, 507 U.S. 725 (1993) (plain-error review for trial errors not raised at trial)
- United States v. Mares, 402 F.3d 511 (5th Cir. 2005) (limits on when error affects fairness or integrity)
- United States v. Leahy, 82 F.3d 624 (5th Cir. 1996) (standard for prejudice in juror removal)
- United States v. Virgen-Moreno, 265 F.3d 276 (5th Cir. 2001) (juror dismissal criteria and discretion)
- United States v. Curtis, 635 F.3d 704 (5th Cir. 2011) (good-faith exception to suppressions for searches)
- United States v. Jackson, 825 F.2d 853 (5th Cir. 1987) (en banc; good faith in searches pre-Gant)
- United States v. Garcia Abrego, 141 F.3d 142 (5th Cir. 1998) (evidence of enterprise participation)
- United States v. Krout, 66 F.3d 1420 (5th Cir. 1995) (non-charged acts admissible to prove conspiracy)
- United States v. Maceo, 947 F.2d 1191 (5th Cir. 1991) (non- Rule 404(b) extrinsic evidence)
- United States v. Willingham, 310 F.3d 367 (5th Cir. 2002) (harmless-error standard)