State v. Aguero
State of North Dakota, Plaintiff and Appellee
Billy Joe Valdez Aguero, Defendant and Appellant
Northeast Central Judicial District,
Grand Forks County
Judge Lawrence E. Jahnke
|Nature of Action:||Homicide|
|Term:||06/2010  Argument: 06/25/2010|
|ND cite:||2010 ND 210|
791 N.W.2d 001
Listen to recording of oral argument in MP3 format
Appellant's Statement of the Issues:|
I. Did the trial court err when it required Defendant/Appellant Aguero during the guilt phase of the trial to be shackled?
II. Did the trial court err, when it allowed over Defendant/Appellant Aguero's objection, Investigator Hoffman to comment on Mr. Aguero's right to remain silent?
III. When a co-defendant's attorney, over Defendant/Appellant Aguero's objection, calls a witness during trial and asks questions that open the door to having his client named as a participant in two murders, does that questioning also open the door to having Mr. Aguero named a participant in the murders?
IV. Did the trial court fail to properly admonish the jury during the trial?
APPELLANT'S SUPPLEMENTAL BRIEF ISSUES
I.Should the record be amended to reflect that jurors saw Defendant/Appellant, Billy Joe Valdez Aguero in shackles in the courtroom and/or the courthouse during the trial?
REPLY BRIEF ISSUES
ISSUE I:Did the trial court err when it required Defendant/Appellant Aguero during the guilt phase of the trial to be shackled?
ISSUE II:The use of non-visible restraints was permissible as raised by Defendant-Moncada and Defendant-Aguero.
Appellee's Statement of the Issues:
I. Whether the District Court erred when permitting a witness to testify to non-testimonial hearsay statements of a decedent when the statement qualifies as under Rule 803(1) and/or 803(3) of the North Dakota Rules of Evidence as an exception to the hearsay rule or a proper non-hearsay purpose as raised by Defendant-Moncada?
II. Whether the District Court erred or violated Moncada and Aguero's right to a fair trial when the Court ordered the Defendant be subject to non-visible leg restraints during the trial as raised by Defendant-Moncada and Defendant-Aguero?
III. Whether the District Court abused its discretion when finding good cause to extend the detainer action as raised by Defendant-Moncada?
IV. Whether the District Court erred in permitting testimony from Investigator Hoffman as alleged by Defendant-Aguero?
V. Whether the District Court abused its discretion in permitting testimony with respect to a prior consistent statement as raised by Defendant-Aguero?
VI. Whether a failure to admonish the jurors is reversible error, as alleged by Defendant-Aguero, when there was a failure to object at trial and no prejudice alleged or demonstrated?
|Add Docket 20090241 RSS|
|1||08/20/2009 NOTICE OF APPEAL: 08/19/2009|
|2||08/20/2009 ORDER FOR TRANSCRIPT: 08/19/2009|
|3||08/24/2009 Acknowledgment of Order for Transcript & RETENTION OF RECORD ON APPEAL: 10/08/2009|
|4||10/08/2009 MOT. EXT/TIME TRANSCRIPT (court reporter)|
|5||10/08/2009 ACTION BY TRIAL COURT. Granted: 11/17/2009|
|6||11/09/2009 Transcripts dated 1-27-09, 2-27-09, 6-12-09, 6-15-09 (Final Pretrial Conference), 6-15-09 through|
|7||11/09/2009 6-25-09 (Vols. 1-9), & 8-7-09 & C.O.S.|
|8||11/09/2009 DISK of tras dated 1-27-09, 2-27-09, 6-12-09, 6-15-09, & 8-7-09|
|9||11/12/2009 DISK-tra (Jury trial dated 6/15/09 - 6/19/09, 6/22/09, 6/24/09, and 6/25/09) (vols. 1-6, 8 & 9)|
|10||11/16/2009 MOT. EXT/TIME APPELLANT BRIEF (sua sponte)|
|11||11/16/2009 ACTION BY CHIEF DEPUTY CLERK. Granted: 12/28/2009|
|12||11/18/2009 DISK-tra (Jury trial dated 6/23/09 - Vol. 7)|
|13||11/18/2009 RECORD ON APPEAL (Not Rec'd: #11,18,23,30,40,66,100,101,& 102 -- Steno Notes & Digital Recordings)|
|14||12/18/2009 MOTION FOR Remand to Modify|
|15||12/18/2009 E-FILED MOTION|
|16||12/18/2009 MOT. EXT/TIME APPELLANT BRIEF (included in Motion for Remand to Modify)|
|17||12/22/2009 Transcript dated March 19, 2009, (see Sup. Ct. 20090254) - per letter from Pulkrabek dated 12/22/09|
|18||12/22/2009 ACTION BY CHIEF JUSTICE (Motion to Remand). Granted|
|19||12/22/2009 ORDER OF REMAND|
|20||12/22/2009 Order of Remand sent to Parties|
|21||12/22/2009 ACTION BY CHIEF JUSTICE. Granted: 02/26/2010|
|22||01/19/2010 MOT. EXT/TIME APPELLANT BRIEF & Attachments|
|23||01/19/2010 ACTION BY CHIEF JUSTICE. Granted: 03/26/2010|
|24||03/17/2010 MOT. EXT/TIME APPELLANT BRIEF & Attachments|
|25||03/17/2010 ACTION BY CHIEF JUSTICE. Denied|
|26||03/18/2010 TRANSCRIPT DATED FEBRUARY 24, 2010, & C.O.S.|
|27||03/18/2010 DISK-TRA (2/24/10) E-MAILED|
|28||03/23/2010 Clerk's Supplemental Certificate of Record dated March 22, 2010. (Entry Nos. 235 & 236)(NOTE: This|
|29||03/23/2010 Supplemental was returned to clerk's office to be renumbered. It is now a part of the|
|30||03/23/2010 Supplemental dated 3-30-10 & filed in our office 4-9-10)|
|31||03/26/2010 APPELLANT BRIEF|
|32||03/26/2010 APPELLANT APPENDIX|
|33||03/26/2010 DISK - ATB (e-mailed)|
|34||03/30/2010 Copies of Criminal Judgments (4) for ATA|
|35||04/01/2010 Returning Clerk's Supplemental Cert. of Record dated 3/22/10 to fix numbering errors.|
|36||04/07/2010 Consolidated with 20090254. Attny Pulkrabek will get 20 minutes; Attny Martin will get 25 minutes|
|37||04/09/2010 Supplemental Clerk's Cert. dated 3-30-10 (Entry Nos. 224-240; not rec'd #230-steno notes)|
|38||04/09/2010 Amended Notice of Appeal filed in Grand Forks Co. on 3-30-10|
|39||04/22/2010 MOTION FOR extension of word limit for AEB|
|40||04/22/2010 ACTION BY CHIEF JUSTICE (Extension of word limit of AEB to 12,500 words). Granted|
|41||04/26/2010 APPELLEE BRIEF (e-filed)|
|42||04/26/2010 E-FILED BRIEF (AEB)|
|43||04/26/2010 APPELLEE APPENDIX (e-filed)|
|44||04/26/2010 E-FILED APPENDIX (AEA)|
|45||04/28/2010 Received $25 surcharge for AEB (Receipt #19469)|
|46||04/28/2010 MOTION to file a Supplemental Brief|
|47||04/30/2010 ACTION BY Acting Chief Justice (Sandstrom). Granted|
|48||05/04/2010 Received 7 copies of AEB from CSD|
|49||05/04/2010 Received 6 copies of AEA from CSD|
|50||05/07/2010 SUPPLEMEMTAL APPELLANT'S BRIEF & ADDENDUM|
|51||05/07/2010 DISK-SUPPLEMENTAL ATB (E-MAILED)|
|52||05/07/2010 REPLY BRIEF (Aguero)|
|53||05/07/2010 DISK-RYB (Aguero) e-mailed|
|54||05/18/2010 NOTICE OF ORAL ARGUMENT SENT|
|55||06/03/2010 MOTION to Postpone Oral Argument|
|56||06/04/2010 ACTION BY SUPREME COURT (argument rescheduled to later in June). Granted|
|57||06/22/2010 Request for Radio/TV Coverage (Associated Press) approved|
|58||06/25/2010 APPEARANCES: Robert Martin/Benjamin Pulkrabek/M. Jason McCarthy|
|59||06/25/2010 ARGUED: Martin/Pulkrabek/McCarthy|
|60||06/25/2010 ORAL ARGUMENT WEBCAST|
|61||11/09/2010 DISPOSITION: AFFIRMED|
|62||11/09/2010 SPLIT OPINION: Sandstrom, Dale V.|
|63||11/09/2010 (CONCURRING IN THE RESULT): Maring, Mary Muehlen: CON/RES|
|64||11/09/2010 (CONCURRING SPECIALLY): VandeWalle, Gerald W.: CONCUR|
|65||11/09/2010 (CONCURRING IN THE RESULT): Kapsner, Carol Ronning: CON/RES|
|66||11/09/2010 (JOIN CONCURRING IN THE RESULT): Crothers, Daniel John: JN/CON|
|67||11/10/2010 Judgment E-Mailed to Parties|
|68||11/16/2010 Corrected Opinion Pages 17 & 18|
|69||11/18/2010 Mot. Ext/Time Petition for Rehearing (faxed)|
|70||11/18/2010 ACTION BY CLERK (MPR). Granted: 12/10/2010|
|71||11/30/2010 PETITION FOR REHEARING (e-filed)|
|72||11/30/2010 E-FILED PETITION FOR REHEARING|
|73||12/02/2010 Received $25 e-filing surcharge for PER (Receipt #20081).|
|74||12/06/2010 Received 7 copies of PER from Central Duplicating.|
|75||12/21/2010 ACTION BY SUPREME COURT (PER). Denied|
|77||01/20/2011 RECEIPT SIGNED BY DISTRICT COURT CLERK'S OFFICE|