[DO NOT PUBLISH]

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

________________________

No. 12-11667

________________________

D.C. Docket No. 9:11-cr-80018-KAM-1

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, 

 Plaintiff - Appellee,

versus

THOMAS C. CORREA, 

a.k.a. Thomas Carl Correa,

 Defendant - Appellant.

________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Florida

________________________

(May 28, 2013)

Before BARKETT and MARCUS, Circuit Judges, and CONWAY,* District Judge.

PER CURIAM: 

 

*

Honorable Anne C. Conway, Chief Judge, United States District Court for the Middle 

District of Florida, sitting by designation.

Case: 12-11667 Date Filed: 05/28/2013 Page: 1 of 4 
2

Thomas Correa appeals his conviction following a jury trial of one count of 

conspiracy to commit bank fraud, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1349, and one count 

of making a false statement on a loan application, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1014. 

Correa raises three issues on appeal. He argues that: (1) the district court erred in 

denying his motion for a judgment of acquittal because there was insufficient 

evidence to support his conspiracy conviction; (2) the district court abused its 

discretion in admitting a videotape recording of an undercover meeting because the 

government failed to lay the proper foundation; and (3) the district court erred in 

denying his motion for a new trial based on jury misconduct. We find no 

reversible error on the record.

Although the majority of Correa’s dealings in the bank fraud scheme were 

with a government informant and a FBI agent, the evidence was sufficient for a 

reasonable jury to find that Correa knew the informant would enlist the help of 

bank loan officers, such as William Hebert, to acquire the fraudulent loan. The 

informant repeatedly assured Correa that he had connections at the bank and 

explicitly told Correa that he had bribed Hebert to process the fraudulent loan 

application. Accordingly, there was sufficient evidence to support a conviction for 

conspiracy and we affirm the district court’s denial of Correa’s motion for a 

judgment of acquittal.

Case: 12-11667 Date Filed: 05/28/2013 Page: 2 of 4 
3

We also reject Correa’s argument that the district court abused its discretion 

when it admitted into evidence a videotape recording of an undercover meeting 

because the government failed to properly authenticate the tape. It was not an 

abuse of discretion to conclude that the FBI agent’s testimony regarding the 

informant’s competency to operate the equipment, the identification of the 

individuals shown on the tape, the informant’s inability to tamper with the 

recording, and that the recording appeared to be continuous was sufficient to 

establish the accuracy of the recording. 

Finally, Correa argues that the district court erred when it denied his motion 

for a new trial. Correa first argues that he is entitled to a new trial because the jury 

was given an un-redacted version of videotape during deliberations that the court 

had redacted during trial because it included inadmissible hearsay. Correa was 

aware during trial that the district court ruled a portion of a videotape to be 

inadmissible and had an opportunity to examine the tape before it was sent to the 

jury. Thus, he cannot show that his failure to discover the un-redacted videotape 

before the jury returned its verdict was not due to a lack of due diligence and we 

affirm the district court’s denial of his motion on this ground.

Correa also argues that he is entitled to a new trial because of newlydiscovered evidence that the jury engaged in premature deliberations. The alleged 

newly discovered evidence consisted of an affidavit from a friend of Correa, 

Case: 12-11667 Date Filed: 05/28/2013 Page: 3 of 4 
4

stating that she had been approached by an alternate juror several weeks after the 

trial who claimed that many of the jurors discussed the case before the start of 

deliberations and that one of the jurors attempted to convince the others of 

Correa’s guilt during trial. No affidavit was submitted from the alternate juror. In 

light of the district court’s broad discretion to determine whether evidence of jury 

misconduct warrants an evidentiary hearing and the stringent limitations imposed 

on a court’s ability to question jurors about their deliberations post-verdict, see, 

e.g., United States v. Siegelman, 640 F.3d 1159, 1186-87 (11th Cir. 2011); United 

States v. Cuthel, 903 F.2d 1381, 1383 (11th Cir. 1990), under the circumstances 

here, we find no abuse of discretion.

AFFIRMED.

Case: 12-11667 Date Filed: 05/28/2013 Page: 4 of 4