Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

United States v. Santillan

United States District Court, N.D. Texas, Dallas Division

November 8, 2017

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff,
v.
JOSE SANTILLAN, Defendant.

          MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER

          SIDNEY A. FITZWATER UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

         In this memorandum opinion and order, the court addresses defendant Jose Santillan's (“Santillan's”) May 11, 2017 motions for discovery and a May 30, 2017 motion for discovery filed by the government.

         Santillan is charged in a one-count indictment with conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute 50 grams or more of methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846. The trial is set for December 4, 2017.

         I

         In Santillan's discovery motions, he moves for 13 categories (including subcategories) of discovery. The court has organized some of Santillan's categories of evidence into subcategories for purposes of this memorandum opinion and order.

         A

         In requests Nos. 1-3, 11 and 12, Santillan requests that the government be ordered to disclose information or evidence as required by Fed. R. Crim. P. 16(a)(1)(A)-(D). In request No. 1, Santillan requests that the government be ordered to disclose all oral, written, or recorded statements made by Santillan within the possession, custody, or control of the government, including any audio recordings and the substance of any oral statements made by him to government agents or law enforcement officers, including probation or parole officers, before or after his arrest. Santillan requests in request No. 2 that the government be ordered to disclose all books, papers, documents, photographs, tangible objects, or copies or portions thereof, within the possession, custody, or control of the government that are material to the preparation of Santillan's defense, or are intended as evidence in chief at the trial, or were obtained from or belong to Santillan. This request includes any checks and other securities, computers, programs, software, diskettes, printers, check stock, counterfeit payroll, chemicals, fingerprints, handwriting exemplars, identification, bank statements, and other potential evidence. In request No. 3, Santillan requests that the government be ordered to disclose any results or reports of all physical or mental examinations and of scientific tests or experiments conducted by federal or state authorities in the course of the investigation of this case, and any related state investigation of Santillan, including all fingerprints or handwriting reports, and results compiled by, and who examined, known fingerprints, palm prints, or handwriting exemplars of Santillan and compared them to questioned specimens. This request includes any chemical analysis of narcotics and reports generated from tests, and a request to review the reports of polygraph tests administered to participating government informants. Santillan requests in request No. 11 that the government be ordered to disclose any information or evidence gained by electronic surveillance, including wiretaps, videotapes, and tape recorded conversations, or the like, concerning Santillan, any alleged coconspirators or codefendants, and/or any witness. This request includes any copies of written transcripts, reports, or an opportunity to see or hear any information or evidence so gathered. In request No. 12, Santillan requests that the government be ordered to disclose a copy of his prior criminal record, including the disposition of the cases.

         To the extent that Santillan requests discovery that the government is required to disclose under Rules 16(a)(1)(A)-(D), 12(b)(4), and 26.2, Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 (1963), and its progeny, Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150 (1972), and its progeny, and/or the Jencks Act, 18 U.S.C. § 3500, the motion is granted. To the extent his requests exceed what is required by these authorities, the motion is denied. The government need not produce any discoverable statements covered by the Jencks Act or Rule 26.2 until the deadline specified infra at § II.

         B

         Santillan requests in request No. 4 that the government be ordered to disclose any evidence that may be used to impeach any government witness, including any evidence that may be used to substantially impeach the credibility of any key government witness and any government witness' prior criminal record or other prior material acts of misconduct. In request No. 5, Santillan requests that, pursuant to Fed.R.Evid. 613, the government be ordered to disclose all information that it has regarding inconsistent statements of any witness it may call at trial. In request No. 6, Santillan requests that, pursuant to Fed.R.Evid. 607 and 608, the government be ordered to disclose any information regarding the untruthfulness of any government witness that it may call at trial. He requests in request No. 7 that the government be ordered to disclose any information known to the government, or that may become known by searching its files and the files of other government agencies, regarding the use of narcotics by any witness whom the government may call at trial, at the time of their cooperation with the government, when they appeared before the grand jury, when they entered their guilty pleas, or at trial. He also requests disclosure of any psychiatric examinations administered to any informant witness.

         To the extent Santillan requests discovery that the government is required to disclose under Rules 12(b)(4), 16, and 26.2, Brady, Giglio, and/or the Jencks Act, the motion is granted. To the extent his requests exceed what is required by these authorities, the motion is denied.

         C

         In request No. 8, Santillan requests that the government be ordered to disclose any notes, tapes, and/or memoranda made by a government agent, including any person who may have been acting as an informer, or in an investigative or undercover capacity. Santillan also requests that, if such notes, tapes, and/or memoranda were once in existence but have since been destroyed, the government be ordered to disclose the purpose and exact information surrounding their destruction, and if such items have not been destroyed, the government be ordered to preserve such items.

         To the extent Santillan requests discovery that the government is required to disclose under Rules 12(b)(4), 16, and 26.2, Brady, Giglio, and/or the Jencks Act, the motion is granted. To the extent his requests exceed what is required by these authorities, the motion is denied. The court grants Santillan's request that the government be required ...


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Download the entire decision to receive the complete text, official citation,
docket number, dissents and concurrences, and footnotes for this case.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.