Admission of Evidence – Ballistics Evidence

Listen to this article

7^th Circuit Court of Appeals

Case Name: United States of America v. Ernesto Godinez

Case No.: 19-3425

Officials: EASTERBROOK, WOOD, and BRENNAN, Circuit Judges.

Focus: Admission of Evidence – Ballistics Evidence

Law enforcement officers entered a southwest Chicago neighborhood one night to replace tracking devices on the cars of several Latin Saints gang members. Shortly after the officers arrived, they came under gun‐ fire and a federal agent was shot and seriously injured.  A federal grand jury indicted Ernesto Godinez, a member of the gang, for the shooting. In the government’s view, Godinez, tasked with guarding the neighborhood, mistook federal agents from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Fire‐ arms (“ATF”) for rival gang members and shot Special Agent Kevin Crump. After a six‐day trial, a jury found Godinez guilty.

Godinez now appeals, arguing that the district court wrongly admitted certain evidence and that the jury did not receive sufficient evidence to convict him of shooting Crump. We conclude that the district court properly admitted ballistics evidence concerning the shots fired, although evidence from and testimony about a gunshot detection system— ShotSpotter—should have been handled differently. Because a rational jury, even without the improperly admitted evidence, could have found beyond a reasonable doubt that Godinez shot Crump, we affirm.

Affirmed

Full Text

Derek A Hawkins is Corporate Counsel, at Salesforce.