Viveros-Flores
United States v. Viveros-Flores
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM **
The disMct court did not abuse its discretion by denying the motion of Defendant-Appellant Joel Viveros-Flores for a new trial or mistrial on the basis of Agent Dillman’s isolated reference to the death of fourteen illegal aliens in the desert. This single, unobjected-to reference pertained to an investigation of someone other than the defendant. Moreover, as the district court noted, nothing suggested that the prosecutor prompted the response or ex *213 pected such an answer. The prosecutor did not repeat or refer to this testimony at any other point in the trial. The jury instructions referred only to the smuggling of five aliens and the death of one of them. As the district court found, in the context of the trial, and given the limited nature of the statement, there was no likelihood that this one response “could have affected the jury’s discharge of its duty to follow the Court’s instructions and fairly weigh all of the evidence.” As such, there was no abuse of discretion by denying the motion for mistrial or new trial.
Nor did the district court abuse its discretion by admitting testimony about workers scattering when agents arrived at Vazquez Harvesting and…