United States v. Armando Alvarez-Lopez

Armando Alvarez-Lopez (“Alvarez”) appeals from his conviction for conspiracy to possess and possession of heroin in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846 , 841(a)(1). The question on appeal is whether the district court committed prejudicial error in refusing to permit Alvarez to inquire into the Government’s star witness’ prior arrest for smuggling narcotics. Following Alford v. United States (1931) 282 U.S. 687 , 51 S.Ct. 218 , 75 L.Ed. 624 , and its progeny, we hold that the curtailment of cross-examination was prejudicial error of constitutional dimension requiring reversal.

The Government’s case against Alvarez depended heavily upon the testimony of Rocky Gentile, a Government informant, who was paid by the Government to “make” cases against persons who were engaged in narcotics trafficking. Gentile described himself as an undercover special employee of the DEA, working for DEA Agent Williams. In the course of that employment, Gentile was paid contingent fees when his undercover work resulted in arrests. The amount that Gentile was paid varied with the quantity of drugs seized and the number of people arrested. For this particular case, the DEA paid Gentile $1,000.

According to…