U.S. v. Cruz

Full title: UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff v. HECTOR VARGAS RUBEN CRUZ Defendants

Court: United States District Court, D. Puerto Rico

Date published: Mar 16, 2007

CRIMINAL NO. 06-193 (GAG) (D.P.R. Mar. 16, 2007)

Opinion

CRIMINAL NO. 06-193 (GAG).

March 16, 2007

RULE 29 ORDER

GUSTAVO GELPI, Magistrate Judge

The Court yesterday reserved its ruling on defendants' Rule 29 motion as to Counts II and III. Upon further due consideration of counsels' arguments and the applicable law, the Court hereby grants the motion as to both counts.

Defendants are charged with violating 8 U.S.C. §§ 1324(a)(1)(A)(iii) and (a)(1)(A)(v)(ii). The government's theory is that defendants, using their positions as immigration officers, devised a scheme to maintain illegal alien Hilda Frias in the United States by virtue of her cooperation with immigration authorities. The evidence seen in the light most favorable to the government, evidences exactly this.

It is the government's position that the above conduct encompasses "harboring" under Section 1324. The Court disagrees. "Harboring" constitutes conduct tending substantially to facilitate an alien's remaining in the U.S. illegally and to prevent government authorities from detecting [her] unlawful presence. United States v. Kim, 193 F. 3d 567, 574-575 (2^nd Cir. 1999); see also Webster's New World College Dictionary (4^th ed. 2001) (defining "harbor" as to conceal or hide).

Here, it is abundantly clear that defendants did not take steps to keep Hilda Frias undetected (i.e., "concealed, harbored or shielded") from immigration authorities. To the contrary, they made her illegal presence known to immigration authorities in an effort to keep her in the country by way of her cooperation.

Defendants' despicable conduct certainly constitutes an abuse of power and trust. It may also constitute criminal conduct. But it does not violate Section 1324.

Accordingly, the Court enters judgment of acquittal as to Counts II and III.

SO ORDERED.