United States v. Tribble
559 F.Supp.3d 41
D.P.R.2021Background
- After Hurricane María, FEMA Deputy Regional Administrator Asha Tribble supervised power/infrastructure recovery in Puerto Rico; Cobra Acquisitions president Donald Ellison contracted with PREPA.
- The government alleges Ellison provided Tribble with gifts and benefits (travel, housing, security) and that Tribble steered work/payments to Cobra in exchange, producing an indictment for conspiracy, honest-services wire fraud, disaster fraud, Travel Act counts, and false statements.
- Defendants sought pretrial disclosure of three grand jury transcripts (DHS OIG SA Joseph Kenney’s testimony) and two DHS Memoranda of Activity (MOA #4 and MOA #6) containing forensic-auditor reports.
- The government produced voluminous discovery, provided redacted grand jury transcripts, and submitted unredacted transcripts for in camera review; it argued Jencks/Rule 16(a)(2) protections and that any Brady/Giglio material will be timely disclosed.
- The court conducted an in camera review, concluded the redacted grand jury material contained no exculpatory evidence, and held the DHS forensic reports were exempt from pretrial disclosure under Rule 16(a)(2), while reminding the government of its ongoing Brady/Giglio duties.
- Result: Defendants’ motion to compel pretrial production of the grand jury transcripts and MOA reports was denied.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Pretrial disclosure of grand jury / Jencks material | Gov't: Jencks Act requires production only after witness completes direct testimony; not a pretrial discovery tool | Defs: Need transcripts now to prepare defense and may contain exculpatory/impeachment material | Denied — Jencks/Rule 26.2 permits withholding until after direct testimony; in camera review found no Brady material |
| Disclosure of DHS MOAs / internal auditor reports | Gov't: Rule 16(a)(2) exempts internal reports; will produce any Brady/Giglio material when required | Defs: MOAs likely contain impeachment/exculpatory evidence and should be produced now | Denied — internal reports excluded from disclosure under Rule 16(a)(2); ongoing Brady duty acknowledged but no present basis to compel production |
Key Cases Cited
- Jencks v. United States, 353 U.S. 657 (establishes witness-statement disclosure rule later codified in the Jencks Act)
- Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (requires disclosure of exculpatory evidence)
- Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (requires disclosure of impeachment material affecting witness credibility)
- United States v. Tejeda, 974 F.2d 210 (1st Cir. 1992) (authorizes withholding Jencks materials until after witness completes direct testimony)
- United States v. Padilla-García, 990 F.3d 60 (1st Cir. 2021) (Jencks Act is not a pretrial discovery tool)
- United States v. González-Meléndez, 570 F.3d 1 (1st Cir. 2009) (court must independently review Jencks material when challenged)