Alvarez

United States v. Alvarez

Good Law
86 F.3d 901·96 Daily Journal DAR 7045·1996 WL 330479·1996 U.S. App. LEXIS 14719·96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4336
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJune 18, 1996No. 94-50187California3,449 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Fletcher, J.

Jairo Cuevas Alvarez (“Cuevas”) appeals from his judgment of conviction on cocaine trafficking charges. Cuevas contends that the government committed Brady error by failing to produce exculpatory evidence, that the trial court erred by denying his motion for disclosure of tape-recorded surveillance notes pursuant to the Jencks Act, and that the court erred by denying his motion for a new trial based on newly discovered evidence improperly withheld by the government.

Although we find that the United States improperly carried out its discovery responsibilities under the Jencks Act and Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83 , 83 S.Ct. 1194 , 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963), we conclude that Cuevas was not prejudiced by the United States’ actions. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and affirm.

I.

On June 4, 1992, a federal grand jury returned a 13-count indictment against defendants Cuevas, Yepez, Ortiz, Jose Pinto, Edgar Florez, and Oscar LNU (i.e., last name unknown). All defendants were charged in count one with conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute and to distribute cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846 , 841(a)(1). Cuevas and Ortiz were charged in count twelve…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.