Opinion ID: 215914
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: The Verdict and the Posttrial Motions

Text: The jury found Persico and DeRoss guilty on the three counts indicated above, i.e., murder of Cutolo in aid of racketeering, witness tampering with respect to Peggy Cutolo, Cutolo Jr., and Cardinale (collectively the Cutolos), and conspiracy to tamper with the testimony of the Cutolos. Persico and DeRoss had also been charged in the indictment with one count of conspiring to murder Campanella in 2001 and with two counts of firearms violations in connection with the attempt on Campanella's life. The jury acquitted Persico and DeRoss on the latter three charges. After the jury returned its verdicts, Persico and DeRoss moved pursuant to Fed. R.Crim.P. 29(c) for judgments of acquittal, contending that the government had failed to present sufficient evidence as to one or more elements of each of the counts on which they were convicted. As to the murder count, they argued that there was insufficient evidence to prove (a) that Cutolo was in fact dead, (b) that Cutolo died as a result of murder, or (c) if Cutolo was murdered, that Persico or DeRoss murdered him or commanded, procured, or caused his murder. As to the witness tampering counts, they argued that the evidence was insufficient to show any intent to influence or interfere with any potential testimony of any member of the Cutolo family in an official proceeding. In addition, Persico and DeRoss moved pursuant to Fed.R.Crim.P. 33 for a new trial on various grounds. In their original motion, pointing to testimony by Peggy Cutolo that she had informed the government of finding the $1.65 million in cash stashed away by Cutolo and had been allowed to keep the money, defendants contended principally that either that testimony was perjurious and the government had violated its obligations under Giglio v. United States, 405 U.S. 150, 92 S.Ct. 763, 31 L.Ed.2d 104 (1972), or the government had violated its obligations under Giglio and Brady v. Maryland, 373 U.S. 83, 83 S.Ct. 1194, 10 L.Ed.2d 215 (1963), by failing to disclose to the defense that Peggy had been allowed to keep that money. In response, the government submitted the affidavit of a former Assistant United States Attorney (AUSA), subsequently supported by documentation, stating that the AUSA became aware in late 2000 or early 2001 that Peggy had told the FBI that she was in possession of a large amount of cash found in the Cutolo home after Cutolo disappeared, and that later in 2001 the government decided not to seek forfeiture of, or taxes on, that money. Before the district court had ruled on either set of motions, Cutolo's body was found, buried in Farmingdale, New York. The government informed the court of the discovery and reported that the local medical examiner had identified the cause of death as homicide. (Letter from AUSA John Buretta et al. to Judge Seybert dated October 7, 2008.) Persico and DeRoss immediately augmented their new-trial motions, arguing that this new evidence directly contradicts the theory on which the government proceeded at trial, to wit, that Persico had Cutolo's body put on a boat and taken out to sea and that Mr. Persico made a telephone call to a marina on the date of Cutolo's disappearance to arrange such disposal. (Letter from Sarita Kedia [counsel for Persico] and Robert LaRusso [counsel for DeRoss] to Judge Seybert dated October 7, 2008, at 1 (emphasis omitted).) In a Memorandum and Order dated November 24, 2008 (District Court 2008 Order), the district court denied both sets of motions. With respect to the motions for acquittal, the court concluded that the evidence was sufficient, largely citing evidence described above and in Parts II.B. and C. below. See District Court 2008 Order at 5-10, 13-17. The district court also denied defendants' new-trial motions. It reasoned that although the discovery of Cutolo's body contradicted the government's theory as to the disposal of Cutolo's body, the whereabouts of Cutolo, Sr.'s body [wa]s immaterial, id. at 25. The court pointed out that Defendants' convictions were not based on the theory that Persico or DeRoss pulled the trigger or that either Defendant was even present at Cutolo's murder. The newly discovered evidence regarding the burial location does not, therefore, contradict the Government's theory of the actual murder. The Government presented more than sufficient evidence to establish that the Defendants ordered Cutolo, Sr.'s death. Id. Finally, the district court concluded that Persico and DeRoss were not entitled to a new trial on the theory that Peggy Cutolo had committed perjury or that the government had violated its Brady obligation. It saw no basis for a finding of perjury, given the former AUSA's affidavit indicating that Peggy's testimonythat she had disclosed to the government, and had been allowed to keep, the $1.65 millionwas true. See id. at 29-32. The court rejected the Brady branch of the motion principally on the grounds (a) that although the government should have disclosed those facts earlier, there was no suppression given that the information was disclosed on the fourth day of an eight-week trial, id. at 37, affording defendants ample time to use the information, and (b) that defendants could not show prejudice, as there was virtually no probability that disclosure of this information at an earlier time would have changed the outcome of this case, id. at 40.