16-2585 (L) United States v. Mehta 1 In the 2 United States Court of Appeals 3 For the Second Circuit 4 5 6 August Term 2017 7 8 9 No. 16-2585(L) 10 No. 16-2598(CON) 11 No. 16-2606(CON) 12 13 United States of America, 14 Appellee, 15 16 v. 17 18 Gaurav Mehta, 19 Defendant-Appellant, 20 21 Mary Opoka, 22 Defendant-Appellant, 23 24 Isha Mehta, 25 Defendant-Appellant. 26 27 28 Appeal from the United States District Court 29 for the Northern District of New York 30 Thomas J. McAvoy, District Judge. 31 (Argued: May 21, 2018; Decided: March 21, 2019) 32 33 1 Before: Parker, Livingston, and Chin, Circuit Judges. 2 ________ 3 4 Appeal from judgments of conviction in the United States District Court 5 for the Northern District of New York (McAvoy, J.). The defendants were 6 convicted of marriage fraud and immigration fraud in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 7 1325(c) and 18 U.S.C. §§ 2, 1546(a). During the course of the trial, the judge met 8 with certain jurors ex parte to discuss the jurors’ concerns about two defendants’ 9 out-of-court behavior. He also instructed the jurors that they could consider the 10 defendants’ self-interest in the outcome of the case when analyzing their trial 11 testimony. These errors compel us to VACATE the judgments of the District 12 Court and REMAND. 13 ________ 14 15 DAVID B. GOODHAND, United States Department of Justice, 16 Criminal Division, Appellate Section, Washington, DC, and 17 STEVEN D. CLYMER, Assistant United States Attorney, for Grant 18 C. Jaquith, United States Attorney for the Northern District of 19 New York, Albany, NY, for the United States of America. 20 21 HARRY SANDICK, Patterson Belknap Webb & Tyler LLP, New 22 York, NY, for Gaurav Mehta. 23 24 ERIC K. SCHILLINGER, Law Office of Eric K. Schillinger, East 25 Greenbush, NY, for Mary Opoka. 26 27 ROBERT A. CULP, Law Office of Robert A. Culp, Garrison, NY, 28 for Isha Mehta. 29 30 ________ 31 32 33 34 2 1 BARRINGTON D. PARKER, Circuit Judge: 2 Defendant Mary Opoka was convicted of marriage fraud, and defendants 3 Gaurav Mehta and Isha Mehta were each convicted of both marriage fraud and 4 immigration fraud. See 8 U.S.C. § 1325(c); 18 U.S.C. §§ 2, 1546(a). During the 5 course of the trial in the United States District Court for the Northern District of 6 New York (McAvoy, J.), the judge met ex parte with five jurors and discussed the 7 jurors’ concerns about two defendants’ out-of-court behavior. In addition, the 8 judge later instructed the jurors that, when analyzing the defendants’ testimony, 9 they could consider how the defendants’ self-interest in the outcome of the case 10 could create a motive to testify falsely. The circumstances of the meeting with 11 the jurors and the jury charge relating to a testifying defendant’s motivation to lie 12 are directly contrary to the law of this Circuit. Because these errors undermine 13 the presumption of innocence ...
Original document
Source: All recent Immigration Decisions In All the U.S. Courts of Appeals