Judge Says Evidence Was Withheld In Gun Case

LAS CRUCES — Three members of a Deming-area family of firearms dealers targeted in a federal gun-smuggling case are entitled to a new trial after a federal judge ruled Friday that prosecutors improperly withheld damaging information about a key prosecution witness.

The information, which was not disclosed to the court until four months after the trial ended last summer, concerned the fact that the FBI, dating to 2003, had investigated the witness, Luna County sheriff’s investigator Alan Batts.

Subjects of the Batts investigation included allegations of theft of money from a drug dealer, working with Mexican drug traffickers and assisting with alien smuggling. No charges have ever been filed against him.

Defense attorneys Robert Gorence and Jason Bowles, both former federal prosecutors, argued that jurors should have been allowed to hear the information to assess Batts’ credibility as a witness.

The disclosure about Batts “would have put the entire investigation in a negative light,” Brack wrote in a 12-page order that raised questions about prosecutor conduct. Later, he added: “Impeachment information about Deputy Batts, a key investigator and government witness, could have easily altered the outcome of the trial.”

The judge said there could “be no doubt” the damaging information about Batts had been in a U.S. Attorney’s Office file for nearly a decade, and that the prosecution team supervisor, Randy Castellano, was “repeatedly reminded” that his office held material that would raise questions about Batts.

“Regardless of the reason why the warnings went unheeded (or, more darkly, were ignored), there is no doubt that the prosecution, intentionally or negligently, suppressed the evidence,” the judge said.

Judge Robert Brack ordered the release of two members of the Reese family pending a new trial. Rick Reese, 57, and his 25-year-old son Ryin Reese, who have been in federal custody since their arrests 17 months ago, were to be released Friday from the Doña Ana County Detention Center on $10,000 secured bonds, according to their attorneys.

Whether the office of U.S. Attorney Kenneth Gonzales will proceed with a new trial, appeal Brack’s decision or drop the charges is unclear.

“The U.S. Attorney’s Office is reviewing the court’s order . . . and assessing whether it will seek to file an appeal,” the office said in a one-sentence response to questions Friday. The office did not comment on remarks the judge made in his ruling.

However, in arguing against a new trial last week, federal prosecutor Maria Armijo said Batts was never charged, the allegations were never substantiated and Batts testified he knew nothing about the investigation and so had no motive to tailor his testimony at trial.

Gorence, in a telephone interview, said, “My client (Rick Reese) . . . is happy and joyful, but it’s tempered by the knowledge he spent (17 months) in jail and did not receive a fair trial because, as Judge Brack found, the government either intentionally or negligently deep-sixed evidence that was favorable to the Reeses.”

Rick Reese, his wife Terri, and sons Ryin and Remington, 21, were arrested on Aug. 24, 2011, after a 30-count indictment charged them with making false statements on federal paperwork required during gun sales, smuggling weapons, and conspiring to commit money-laundering.

The case was bolstered by hours of secretly recorded video of weapons buys made by undercover agents and a government informant who frequently dropped hints the weapons were headed to a Mexican drug-trafficking gang. But defense attorneys argued that the Reeses were simply engaged in legal, properly recorded sales and had no idea the weapons were supposed to go to Mexico.

After a trial that ended in July, Brack dismissed two money-laundering charges, and a jury acquitted the Reeses of 24 of the remaining 28 charges. Remington Reese was found not guilty, but Rick and Terri Reese were convicted of one charge, and Ryin of two charges, of making false statements on firearms forms. Customers must fill out the forms attesting they are the true buyers of the weapons and not middlemen, or so-called straw buyers.

Brack, in a footnote, observed that he previously granted an unnamed defendant in a separate case a new trial for the same reason cited in the Reeses’ case: an assistant U.S. attorney in the Las Cruces branch “failed to disclose information” about another law enforcement officer under investigation by the FBI.

Assistant U.S. Attorney Richard Williams, who knew about the FBI’s investigation of Batts, learned the officer had been called as a prosecution witness while observing closing arguments on July 31. Williams immediately requested FBI information about Batts’ involvement, but the U.S. Attorney’s Office did not disclose the matter until nearly four months later, the judge’s ruling said.

That was when the U.S. Attorney’s Office filed a sealed motion asking Brack to review 126 pages of information and rule that the material about Batts did not have to be provided to defense attorneys.

“There is no satisfactory explanation why the United States Attorney’s Office waited an additional four months to file the …motion,” Brack wrote.

Bowles said that the “right thing” for the U.S. Attorney’s Office to do would be to “just move on.”

“We already took a shot at this, these citizens spent 18 months in jail, and it’s time to move on,” he said.

Still hanging in the balance is a civil case in which the government is seeking the forfeiture of the Reese’s property, including 1,428 firearms, nearly two million rounds of ammunition, $117,000 in gold and silver coins and more than $117,000 in cash.
— This article appeared on page A1 of the Albuquerque Journal