USA Vs Mageno
Aug 11, 2014OUTCOME: Reversed and remanded
My client,Nancy Mageno, went to trial because she was translating telephone conversations for her Godson that only spoke Spanish. In retrospect ,the conversation did involve drugs. But, the questions f ... or the jury was did she know itat the time? She testified that she did not. Also she testified that when she noticed she was being fallowed by undercover officers, she confronted them and said “why are you following me?” As it turned out they were following her Godson “ V” .Her Godson V testified, but his testimony differed a bit from what she said he would say “I’m sorry those undercover cops were following me. He squirreled and he was not so definitive in fact he spefically said that he did not say that My main argument was that there was insufficient evidence that she knew what was happening and for her to be convicted, But The 9th circuit rejected that argument. But, they reversed because the prosecutors ’made several misstatements of fact during the closing argument which encouraged the jury to convict during the closing argument which encouraged the jury to convict Mageno on the basis of evidence not presented at trial. The court determined that there was a reasonable probability that the misstatements affected the outcome? and they reversed. It sounds great, but the court remanded the case back to Las Vegas for a new trial.
