United States v. Figueroa

Rick Kerezman contacted state parole officers to complain that his neighbor, parolee Edwin Figueroa (defendant), was drinking, was using drugs, and had fired a gun in his apartment, violating his parole. The officers conducted an unannounced search during which they found a spent .22-caliber shell casing on Figueroa’s living-room floor and a sawed-off .22-caliber rifle in a hallway just outside Figueroa’s apartment. A ballistics expert confirmed the rifle fired the shell casing. Figueroa claimed that although his fingerprints were on the rifle, he never fired it. Instead, he claimed someone called John fired it. The government charged Figueroa with unlawful possession of a firearm. At trial, the officers testified about their findings. Additionally, Figueroa’s roommate testified that Figueroa had wanted a gun for protection and had shown the roommate the firearm. Kerezman’s girlfriend testified she saw Figueroa put the rifle in the hallway after the parole officers knocked on his door. Jonathan Wright, an acquaintance of Figueroa’s, testified that he purchased the rifle and later sold it to Figueroa. The defense wanted to cross-examine Wright about his swastika tattoos, arguing they showed bias against Figueroa, who belonged to a racial or ethnic minority. The prosecution objected, arguing the tattoos did not reflect on Wright’s credibility or motive to lie in this case. The district-court judge did not allow the defense to cross-examine Wright about the tattoos. The jury convicted Figueroa, and Figueroa appealed, arguing that the district court violated the Sixth Amendment’s Confrontation Clause by preventing him from cross-examining Wright.