IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA

NORTHERN DIVISION

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA )

)

vs. ) Criminal Case No. 2:06-cr-200-CSC

)

ROSA E. RINCON )

DEFENDANT’S SECOND MOTION IN LIMINE

COMES NOW Defendant, by and through counsel, and prays that this Court will Order

in limine that the government refrain from arguing, eliciting testimony, or offering evidence of

any sort – particularly “expert” testimony – as to what Defendant Rincon knew about the

purported cargo of the vehicle in which she was riding at the time of the events giving rise to this

criminal action.

Defendant Rincon fully expects that the government will attempt to introduce “expert”

testimony from government agents about the activities of drug trafficking enterprises and about

the usual behavior of the participants of such enterprises. Specifically, Defendant Rincon

suspects that the government will attempt to elicit testimony to the effect that drug trafficking

organizations do not employ “blind mules,” i.e., persons who do not know that they are

transporting drugs.

Such testimony would necessarily imply a certain mental state of Defendant Rincon – that

she knew that there were drugs in the bed of the pickup truck in which she was riding – and that

would run afoul of Rule 704(b), F.R.Evid., which provides that, “[n]o expert witness testifying

with respect to the mental state or condition of a defendant in a criminal case may state an

opinion or inference as to whether the defendant did or did not have the mental state or condition

Case 2:06-cr-00200-WHA-CSC Document 47 Filed 09/25/2006 Page 1 of 3
constituting an element fo the crime charged or of a defense thereto. Such issues are for the trier

of fact alone.”

Testimony as to the “usual” practices of drug traffickers will necessarily imply that

Defendant Rincon had the requisite mental state for the commission of the crime at issue here, in

direct contravention of the strictures of Rule 704(b).

WHEREFORE, the premises considered, Defendant prays that the Court will order in

limine that the government be prohibited from offering or alluding to such evidence in any way

or by any means, and that the government be directed to instruct its witnesses that they not refer

in any way, either directly or by implication, to the mental status of Defendant Rincon.

RESPECTFULLY SUBMITTED, this __23rd__ day of September, 2006.

/s/ JAY LEWIS

Law Offices of Jay Lewis, L.L.C.

P.O. Box 5059

Montgomery, Alabama 36103

(334) 263-7733 (Voice)

(334) 832-4390 (Fax)

J-Lewis@JayLewisLaw.com

ASB-2014-E66J

Attorney for Defendant

Case 2:06-cr-00200-WHA-CSC Document 47 Filed 09/25/2006 Page 2 of 3
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE

I hereby certify that on the _23rd_ day of September, 2006, I electronically filed the

foregoing with the Clerk of the Court using the CM/ECF system which will send notification of

such filing to the following parties or counsel:

Terry Moorer

Office of the United States Attorney

One Court Square, Suite 201

Montgomery, AL 36104

/s/ JAY LEWIS

Law Offices of Jay Lewis, L.L.C.

P.O. Box 5059

Montgomery, Alabama 36103

(334) 263-7733 (Voice)

(334) 832-4390 (Fax)

J-Lewis@JayLewisLaw.com

ASB-2014-E66J

Attorney for Defendant

Case 2:06-cr-00200-WHA-CSC Document 47 Filed 09/25/2006 Page 3 of 3