United States of America v. Jose Soto

Camden, New Jersey criminal defense lawyer represented the Defendant charged with one count of conspiracy to commit bank robbery, two counts of bank robbery, and two counts of using and carrying a firearm during and in relation to a crime of violence.



Before opening statements, Defendant objected to the Government's introduction of photographs depicting stacks of cash that were present on Defendant's phone. Defendant asserted that the photographs were unreliable and unfairly prejudicial under Rule 403 of the Federal Rules of Evidence because the photographs were taken from the phone's deleted space and, as such, lacked metadata that would indicate where, when, or how the photographs were taken. The Court denied Defendant's objection, holding that defense counsel could appropriately address these questions through cross-examination. Tr. Vol. 1, 46:3-52:18. Defense counsel subsequently inquired into these issues on cross-examination. Tr. Vol. 1, 200:11-203:9 (crossing Government expert regarding activation date of Defendant's phone), 208:12-209:5 (lack of metadata for disputed photographs).



Defendant's objection was overruled.

Defendant was found guilty.



Affirmed on appeal.