The federal appeals court based in Denver declined last month to overturn a defendant’s drug conviction on account of a bizarre announcement that played over the speakers mid-trial warning about “criminals” who want to “defund the police.”

A three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 10th Circuit also refused to order a new trial based on testimony about a shrine to a “narco saint” found in the defendant’s office.

Domingo Martinez Jr. stood trial in 2021 for one count of selling more than 400 grams of methamphetamine to a confidential police informant out of Martinez’s auto repair shop. Martinez asserted a defense of entrapment, but jurors convicted him and he received 12 years in prison.

At the moment when Martinez was testifying about his interactions with the informant, a court employee attempted to adjust the microphone. Suddenly, an announcement, later described as a robocall, played in the courtroom. Although the transcript did not capture the statement, the voice warned of “criminals” trying to “defund the police.”

“I have no idea what this is,” U.S. District Court Judge Daniel D. Domenico interjected. “Everyone please disregard whatever that was.”

Domenico then ordered a break to figure out what happened. After 15 minutes, jurors returned and Domenico apologized for the disruption, promising it “won’t happen again.”

The defense did not object to Domenico’s handling of the robocall at the time. The court’s clerk told Colorado Politics the audio stemmed from a “random” unmuted call through the public telephone line, which the trial court provided early in the COVID-19 pandemic.

On appeal, Martinez acknowledged he could locate no other court case mirroring what happened to him. But he argued the robocall violated his constitutional rights because it occurred as Martinez testified about law enforcement’s alleged efforts to entrap him.

The message “announced to the jury that ‘criminals’ were seeking to undermine police, and implored the jury to support police against threats posed by ‘criminals,'” wrote public defender Ryan A. Ray.

Following an order from the 10th Circuit, Domenico submitted a statement with his version of events. He largely agreed with Martinez’s characterization of the announcement, noting it lasted “a few seconds.”

“It was much more apparent that the announcement was in the nature of a fundraising robocall,” Domenico wrote. Although it was “accurate to characterize the call as appearing to be pro-police or supportive of the ‘blue lives matter movement,’ it did not expressly use the phrase ‘blue lives matter.'”

The 10th Circuit panel waved aside the notion that Domenico should have done anything differently in the unusual situation, noting he quickly took steps to get the trial back on track.

“There is no indication the jury had time to process what was being said in the robocall announcement, and the court immediately reminded the jury to disregard it,” wrote Senior Judge Paul J. Kelly Jr. in the panel’s Dec. 20 opinion.

Case: People v. Martinez

Decided: December 20, 2023

Jurisdiction: U.S. District Court for Colorado

Ruling: 3-0

Judges: Paul J. Kelly Jr. (author)

Stephanie K. Seymour

Allison H. Eid

Martinez also took issue with testimony from an expert witness, Detective Brian Jeffers, about a shrine to Santa Muerte in Martinez’s office. Jeffers told jurors that in his extensive experience as a narcotics investigator, Santa Muerte shrines are used for “paying homage and asking for protection so they (drug traffickers) don’t get killed by other rival drug traffickers or arrested.”

“Have you ever seen a Santa Muerte shrine at someone’s house who wasn’t associated with drug trafficking?” the prosecutor asked.

“No, sir,” responded Jeffers. Referring to the testimony, the prosecution argued in closing that “you don’t pray to the patron saint of drug trafficking” if a defendant is a victim of police entrapment.

Martinez relied on a 2014 decision of the 10th Circuit that deemed it a mistake to permit a law enforcement witness to testify about Santa Muerte in a similar drug trafficking trial. However, in that case, the 10th Circuit disagreed with the trial judge that Santa Muerte was a “tool” of the drug trade that jurors needed to hear about. Moreover, the witness’ expertise came through his personal research.

Based on that explanation, the panel reviewing Martinez’s appeal concluded there was no complete prohibition on Santa Muerte testimony, but rather a bar against unreliable Santa Muerte testimony.

“Detective Jeffers’s testimony was based solely on his 22 years of law-enforcement experience, with approximately 18 years focused on narcotics, not personal self-study,” wrote Kelly.

He added the government otherwise introduced substantial evidence of Martinez’s guilt.

The case is United States v. Martinez.