United States v. Vazquez-Rosario, 45 F.4th 565

Police stopped a vehicle in Guaynabo, Puerto Rico; José Vázquez was a passenger and loudly claimed to be an FBI agent who investigated corrupt police officers, mentioning he had handcuffs for municipal officers.
Guaynabo police contacted their commissioner and an FBI agent (González); FBI confirmed Vázquez had been a paid FBI source in prior years but was not an active FBI agent in November 2018 and sources are not FBI employees.
Vázquez was indicted under 18 U.S.C. § 912 for falsely impersonating a federal employee under the "acts as such" clause, tried, convicted by a jury, and sentenced to six months' imprisonment.
Post-judgment, Vázquez filed a motion for reconsideration and later filed a notice of appeal after the 14-day deadline; the First Circuit assumed timeliness arguendo because the appeal fails on the merits.
Vázquez also served a last-minute Touhy request seeking three DOJ/FBI witnesses to testify about his past work with the FBI; the district court quashed the request as irrelevant to whether he was an FBI agent at the time of the stop.
On appeal the First Circuit affirmed: it rejected Vázquez's sufficiency arguments (including challenges based on the "thing of value" theory and asserted need to prove intent to defraud) and found no abuse of discretion in quashing the Touhy subpoenas.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument (Government)	Defendant's Argument (Vázquez)	Held
Timeliness of appeal	Appeal untimely; post-judgment motion didn't extend 14‑day deadline	Motion for reconsideration tolled/extended time	Court assumed timeliness arguendo; resolved appeal on merits
Sufficiency — "thing of value" element under § 912	Not required here; charged under "acts as such" modality so no need to prove obtaining value	Conviction improper because only the driver received the ticket (no thing of value to Vázquez)	Affirmed — indictment/conviction was under "acts as such," so "thing of value" irrelevant
Sufficiency — intent to defraud under § 912	No plain‑error reversal; circuit split exists so error not "plain or obvious"; defendant waived proper standard	Argues intent to defraud is required and was not proven	Affirmed — defendant failed to preserve Rule 29; review requires showing of "clear and gross injustice," and no reversible error given unsettled law
Touhy subpoenas for DOJ/FBI witnesses	Quash appropriate: request untimely and proffered testimony not materially relevant to whether Vázquez was an agent in 2018	Testimony material to defense to show FBI affiliation; Touhy request satisfied regulatory requirements	Affirmed — district court did not abuse discretion; witnesses would only show prior paid source status (2011–2017), not that he was an agent in Nov. 2018

Lepowitch v. United States, 318 U.S. 702 (recognizing § 912 includes distinct "acts as such" and "thing of value" modalities)
Barnow v. United States, 239 U.S. 74 (historical treatment of § 912 impersonation offenses)
United States ex rel. Touhy v. Ragen, 340 U.S. 462 (upholding agency rules governing compelled testimony/disclosure)
United States v. González-Rodríguez, 777 F.3d 37 (post-judgment motions do not automatically extend appellate deadlines)
United States v. Castro-Lara, 970 F.2d 976 (failure to preserve Rule 29 limits sufficiency review to avoiding a "clear and gross injustice")
United States v. Crocco, 15 F.4th 20 (where law is unsettled among circuits, error is not "plain or obvious")
Cabral v. U.S. Dep't of Justice, 587 F.3d 13 (district court has broad discretion on discovery/Touhy requests)