United States v. Reyes
672 F. App'x 132
2d Cir.2017Background
- Ronaldo Reyes was convicted after a jury trial in the Northern District of New York of one count of conspiracy and seven counts of unlawfully bringing aliens into the United States for commercial advantage/financial gain (8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)); sentenced to 60 months imprisonment.
- Counts Three through Six charged one incident in which four aliens were transported; cooperating witness Clarisa Gil-Corcino pleaded guilty and testified about Reyes’s role.
- Gil-Corcino testified that Reyes said he and his uncle split smuggling profits, that an alien asked Gil-Corcino to find transport, that Reyes quoted a price, and that Reyes offered to pay Gil-Corcino to pick up aliens after border crossing.
- At trial, the government briefly elicited and the court immediately struck a hearsay response suggesting Reyes was paid; the jury was instructed to disregard it.
- The government introduced infrared photographs from a Buckeye Cam placed near the border; the Border Patrol agent could not precisely locate the camera or provide technical details but testified about its placement and operation.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence that Reyes acted for commercial advantage/financial gain as to Counts 3–6 | Government: circumstantial evidence and Gil-Corcino’s testimony show Reyes arranged paid smuggling as part of a profit-making pattern | Reyes: only one witness and no direct proof he was paid for that specific smuggling instance | Conviction upheld; circumstantial testimony viewed together sufficed for a rational jury to find financial-motive element beyond reasonable doubt |
| Improper hearsay testimony and Sixth Amendment/fair trial claim | Government: the brief hearsay answer was elicited in error but was stricken and harmless | Reyes: stricken hearsay violated his rights and deprived him of a fair trial | No reversal; answer was immediately stricken, jury instructed to disregard, and overall evidence was sufficient—no unfair prejudice shown |
| Admission of Buckeye Cam photographs | Government: photographs authenticated by agent testimony about camera placement/functioning; admissible | Reyes: images of poor quality, agent could not testify to precise location or tech specs, so probative value is minimal and prejudicial | Photographs admissible; district court did not abuse discretion—foundation adequate and any low probative value reduced risk of prejudice |
Key Cases Cited
- United States v. Pierce, 785 F.3d 832 (2d Cir.) (standard for reviewing sufficiency of evidence and jury verdicts)
- United States v. Persico, 645 F.3d 85 (2d Cir.) (evidence assessed in conjunction, not isolation)
- United States v. Agrawal, 726 F.3d 235 (2d Cir.) (jurors presumed to follow instructions to disregard stricken testimony)
- United States v. Coppola, 671 F.3d 220 (2d Cir.) (deferential review of district court evidentiary rulings)