Free Motion in Limine - District Court of Colorado - Colorado

Case 1:00-cr-00531-WYD

Document 2726

Filed 02/12/2008

Page 1 of 4

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Criminal Action No. 00-cr-00531-WYD-2 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. 2. RUDY CABRERA SABLAN, Defendant.

GOVERNMENT'S MOTION IN LIMINE TO PRECLUDE DEFENDANT FAMILY IMPACT TESTIMONY

The United States of America, by Troy A. Eid, United States Attorney for the District of Colorado, through Brenda Taylor and Philip A. Brimmer, Assistant United States Attorneys, moves the Court to preclude Rudy Sablan from introducing evidence of the impact that the defendant's execution would have on his family. 1. On January 4, 2008, the defendant notified the government that he may call in the penalty phase Dr. Spencer Friedman, a psychologist, who will testify about "family relationship/impact issues." More specifically, Dr. Friedman will testify that Rudy Sablan's "death would be very detrimental to his son and others in his family." 2. The Federal Death Penalty defines mitigating factors as "factors in the defendant's background, record, or character or any other circumstances of the offense that mitigate against imposition of the death sentence." 18 U.S.C. § 3592(a)(8).

Case 1:00-cr-00531-WYD

Document 2726

Filed 02/12/2008

Page 2 of 4

Mitigation evidence, however, does not include the impact of any death sentence on other people, such as the defendant's family, since that evidence would shift the focus of the proceedings away from the character of the defendant and improperly confuse the issues before the jury. 3. Nor is testimony from the defendant's family or friends that they love the defendant or oppose imposition of the death penalty proper mitigation evidence. For instance, in Coleman v. Saffel, 869 F.2d 1377, 1393 (10 th Cir. 1989), the court held that, in the penalty phase, evidence that the defendant's wife and sister-in-law loved him "in no way concerned any aspect of his `character or record and any of the circumstances of the offense.'" (Quoting Lockett v. Ohio, 438 U.S. 586, 604 (1978).) The court further stated that "[W]e cannot conclude that the statements of Coleman's wife and sister-in-law qualify as `relevant mitigating evidence' on which a jury legitimately might have grounded feelings of sympathy." 1 Id. In Robison v. Maryland, 829 F.2d 1501, 1504 (10 th Cir. 1987), overruled on other grounds, Romano v. Gibson, 239 F.3d 1156, 1169 (10 th Cir. 2001), the issue before the court was whether the testimony of a victim's relative who did not wish the death sentence imposed was relevant to the issue of mitigation. In rejecting the evidence's relevance to the penalty phase, the court noted that an "individual's personal opinion of how the sentencing jury should acquit its responsibility

By contrast, testimony from family members that the defendant loves and cares for them would be relevant since it is probative of the defendant's character. 2

1

Case 1:00-cr-00531-WYD

Document 2726

Filed 02/12/2008

Page 3 of 4

... relates to neither the character or record of the defendant nor to the circumstances of the offense." See also United States v. Brown, 441 F.3d 1330, 1351 n.8 (8 th Cir. 2006) (citing Robison favorably); Reese v. Delo, 94 F.3d 1177, 1183 (8 th Cir. 1996) (same). 4. Thus, testimony from Dr. Friedman concerning the impact of the defendant's execution on the defendant's son and other family members or testimony from the family members themselves to the same effect is not proper mitigating evidence and should be barred. WHEREFORE the United States requests that Rudy Sablan be precluded from introducing evidence of the effect his execution would have on his family, from introducing evidence of his family's or friends' love and affection for him, or from introducing evidence of friends' or family members' personal views about imposing the death penalty in this case.

Respectfully submitted this 12th day of February, 2008.

TROY A. EID United States Attorney

BY: s/ Brenda K. Taylor BRENDA K. TAYLOR Assistant U.S. Attorney U.S. Attorney's Office 1225 17 th Street, Suite 700 Denver, Colorado 80202 Telephone (303)454-0100 FAX: (303) 454-0406 E-mail address: [email protected] Attorney for Government 3

BY: s/ Philip A. Brimmer PHILIP A. BRIMMER Assistant U.S. Attorney U.S. Attorney's Office 1225 17 th Street, Suite 700 Denver, Colorado 80202 Telephone (303)454-0100 FAX: (303) 454-0403 E-mail address: [email protected] Attorney for Government

Case 1:00-cr-00531-WYD

Document 2726

Filed 02/12/2008

Page 4 of 4

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this 12th day of February, 2008, I electronically filed the foregoing GOVERNMENT'S MOTION IN LIMINE TO PRECLUDE DEFENDANT FAMILY IMPACT TESTIMONY with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system which will send notification of such filing to the following e-mail addresses:

Attorneys for Rudy Sablan Forrest W. Lewis [email protected] Donald R. Knight [email protected]

s/ Veronica Ortiz VERONICA ORTIZ Legal Assistant U.S. Attorney's Office 1225 17th Street, Suite 700 Denver, CO 80202 Phone (303) 454-0100 Fax (303) 454-0403 E-mail address [email protected]

4