In United States v. Santos, No. 18-14529 (Jan. 9,
2020) (Hull, Rosenbaum, Tjoflat), the Court affirmed the defendant's
convictions for naturalization fraud.
The Court rejected the defendant's argument that it was
error for the court to admit a naturalization application form containing written
notations made by the interviewing immigration officer who did not testify at
trial. The Court first found that the
form was admissible non-hearsay as an adopted admission by an opposing party, because
the applicant adopted the form by signing it at the end of the interview. The Court also found that the form was
admissible under the public records exception to hearsay because it was part of
the A-file, immigration officers routinely complete the form during
non-adversarial interviews with applicants, and the primary purpose of the form
is to administrate the naturalization process, not criminal prosecution. The Court also rejected the defendant's
Confrontation Clause challenge because the application form was not
testimonial. It was a public record
produced as a matter of administrative routine for the primary purpose of
determination eligibility for naturalization, not for the purpose of criminal
prosecution.
The Court also found no abuse of discretion by permitting
the government to elicit testimony about the inculpatory portion of a
post-Miranda statement but prohibiting the defendant from eliciting further
testimony about the exculpatory portion.
The rule of completeness did not apply because the exculpatory part of
the statement did not explain or clarify the inculpatory part of the statement.
Finally, the Court found that there was sufficient evidence
to support his conviction for unlawfully procuring naturalization, finding that
his false statements were knowingly made and material to procuring
naturalization.
