Appeals court: Feds suppressed information on drug informant

Tuesday, Dec. 28, 2004 | 9:38 a.m.

CARSON CITY -- A federal appeals court ruled Monday that the government illegally suppressed evidence that may have helped the defense in the trial of Rene Blanco, who was convicted of distributing methamphetamine.

The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals held that government attorneys improperly kept records a secret about Pedro Rivera-Barriga, an illegal immigrant who became an informant to stay in this country.

Rivera-Barriga was used by the Drug Enforcement Administration to set up a drug buy in Winnemucca in 2001 with Blanco and Ediberto Alvarez-Farfan. Rivera-Barriga was one of the chief witnesses at the federal court trial in Reno in 2002. Both men were convicted.

Before the trial, defense lawyers for Blanco asked for information about the informant and were told only that he had been paid and had worked on about 10 cases for DEA. They asked several times for more information about Rivera-Bariga, but the DEA declined to provide other information, saying it feared for the life of Rivera-Barriga.

It was disclosed at trial that Rivera-Barriga was in the country illegally and that he had received a special parole visa in return for his work for the DEA.

The federal appeals court, in a decision written by Judge William Fletcher, said it was obvious "that the government suppressed information that should have been turned over" to comply with a decision of the U.S. Supreme Court about sharing evidence that would help the defense.

Fletcher wrote, "We have no way of knowing, with the case in its current posture, whether the information that has so far come to light about Rivera-Barriga is only the 'tip of the iceberg.' "

It directed U.S. District Judge David Hagen to order the government "to produce all files and other information pertaining to Rivera-Barriga in the possession of the DEA and the INS, as well as any other potentially exculpatory information that the government might have in its possession."

It included any special agreement that Rivera-Barriga had with the government about remaining in this country while he worked as a drug informant.

The appeals court said Hagen should review the evidence and may hold appropriate hearings. It said Hagen has a range of options, including dismissing the indictment for governmental misconduct. Or Hagen could simply let the conviction stand.

In the decision, Fletcher said the U.S. attorney's office may have not known about the special treatment given the drug informant. But Fletcher said it was the duty of the government agencies to cooperate and provide all the exculpatory evidence to the defense.

The appeals court had previously overturned the conviction of the other defendant, Alvarez-Farfan, for other reasons.