United States v. Jorge Negrete-Gonzales, United States of America v. Rogelio Mendoza-Barajas
Opinion
Opinion
Wright, J.
The two defendants here may or may not have conspired to sell cocaine, but a trial rife with error denied them their fundamental right to make the government prove its case. The district court arbitrarily struck the testimony of the key defense witness, permitted the government’s ill-advised inquiry into the defendants’ post-arrest silence, and misinstructed the jury. We reverse and remand for a new trial, with the expectation that these errors will be corrected.
I
The two defendants, Rogelio Mendoza-Barajas (Mendoza) and Jorge Negrete-Gon-zalez (Negrete), were arrested together with Maria Medina-Barajas (Medina) following an undercover drug investigation. Medina pleaded guilty, and a jury convicted Mendoza and Negrete following a joint trial.
The investigation started when Lopez, a confidential informant, told the DEA that he could arrange to buy cocaine from Medina. With the DEA’s encouragement, he arranged a multi-kilogram transaction.
Medina met Lopez and undercover DEA agent Weeks at a grocery store parking lot. Medina arrived, driving Negrete’s car, accompanied by Mendoza. At Medina’s suggestion, Lopez and Weeks followed her to her home to complete the deal.