Free Response to Motion - District Court of Colorado - Colorado

Case 1:00-cr-00531-WYD

Document 2638

Filed 10/19/2007

Page 1 of 5

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 RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO RECONSIDER COURT'S RULING ON RELEASE OF JUROR CONTACT INFORMATION

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, responds as follows to defendant Rudy Sablan's Motion to Reconsider Court's Ruling on Release of Juror Contact Information. 1. Rudy Sablan is asking the Court to reconsider what the Court has already carefully considered ­ whether to contact the William Sablan jurors about their deliberations. 2. By Order of September 24, 2007, the Court denied the defendant's original Motion to Release Juror Contact Information. The Court should similarly deny Rudy Sablan's latest attempt to avoid Local Rule 47.1. 3. Defendant's original motion failed to identify exactly what information he

Case 1:00-cr-00531-WYD

Document 2638

Filed 10/19/2007

Page 2 of 5

hoped to learn from the William Sablan jurors, especially given that the Special Verdict Form already provides a great deal of information about the jurors' votes on the aggravators and mitigators. The defendant's Motion for Reconsideration, however, provides an insight into the type of information that Rudy Sablan is interested in and why granting his motion would adversely affect future trials in this District. 4. As a reason for granting the Motion to Reconsider, Rudy Sablan provides the following rationale: This court has expressed some level of dismay that the Government lawyers in Washington, D.C. feel the need to have this matter continue as a death penalty case in light of the jurors' decision in William Sablan's trial. Those very jurors, who know much about the facts of this case, may share the court's concerns. Motion for Reconsideration at ¶ 6. Later Rudy Sablan states that some of the William Sablan jurors "may be particularly bothered by this matter continuing as a death case...." Id. 5. What is clear from the Motion to Reconsider is that Rudy Sablan is not interested in the jurors' view of the trial evidence. Rather, he is interested in the jurors' current opinions about whether Rudy Sablan should face the death penalty. First, such opinions are of marginal relevance. Only jurors who sit through a trial focused on Rudy Sablan will have a fully-informed opinion as to whether he deserves the death penalty. The William Sablan jurors did not hear anything about Rudy Sablan's criminal history, future dangerousness, or mitigators. Thus, such opinions would not help shape trial

2

Case 1:00-cr-00531-WYD

Document 2638

Filed 10/19/2007

Page 3 of 5

strategy. 6. Second, seeking such opinions is simply a thinly-veiled attempt to turn the jurors into penalty phase witnesses. It appears that Rudy Sablan is trying to identify jurors who, based on the fact William Sablan did not get the death penalty, do not think that it is appropriate for Rudy Sablan to get the death penalty. Such jurors would then be recruited to testify in any penalty phase in this case or, if that were not allowed, a defense investigator would testify about their views. Either way, the effect would be to interject jurors' deliberations into ongoing cases. Not only is that inappropriate as a general matter but it could have the effect of causing future jurors, who recall juror interviews being used in that manner, to try to avoid jury duty. As the Note to Subdivision (b) of Fed. R. Crim. P. 606 states, "[C]ommon fairness requires that absolute privacy be preserved for jurors to engage in the full and free debate necessary to the attainment of just verdicts. Jurors will not be able to function effectively if their deliberations are to be scrutinized in post-trial litigation." (Citing Senate Report No. 93-1277.) These were undoubtedly some of the policy considerations for the adoption of Local Rule 47.1. 7. In short, Rudy Sablan has not identified a persuasive reason for the Court to contact the William Sablan jurors and prompt them to contact counsel.

3

Case 1:00-cr-00531-WYD

Document 2638

Filed 10/19/2007

Page 4 of 5

WHEREFORE the United States requests that the Court deny Rudy Sablan's Motion to Reconsider Court's Ruling on Release of Juror Contact Information.

Respectfully submitted this 19th day of October, 2007.

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

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

4

Case 1:00-cr-00531-WYD

Document 2638

Filed 10/19/2007

Page 5 of 5

CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this 19th day of October, 2007, I electronically filed the foregoing GOVERNMENT'S RESPONSE TO DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO RECONSIDER COURT'S RULING ON RELEASE OF JUROR CONTACT INFORMATION 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 Donald R. Knight [email protected] Forrest W. Lewis [email protected]

By: s/ Veronica Ortiz VERONICA ORTIZ Legal Assistant 1225 Seventeenth Street, Suite 700 Denver, Colorado 80202 Telephone: (303) 454-0100 Facsimile: (303) 454-0403 E-mail: [email protected]

5