United States v. Jesus-Casteneda, No. 11-10397 (9th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this CaseDefendant appealed from a conviction for possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine. At issue was whether a witness's testimony in disguise at trial violated the Confrontation Clause. The witness was a confidential informant and his disguise would protect his identity in light of the inherent dangers of the particular case and the public nature of the courtroom. The court held that in this case, the disguise in the form of a wig and mustache did not violate the Confrontation Clause. Even if the testimony violated defendant's due process rights, such error was harmless.
Court Description: Criminal Law. Affirming a conviction, the panel held that a confidential informant’s testimony at trial in a wig-and-mustache disguise did not violate the Confrontation Clause, where the disguise was necessary to further the witness’s safety and the reliability of his testimony was otherwise assured. The panel did not decide whether the testimony in disguise violated the defendant’s due process rights because any such error was harmless as it is clear beyond a reasonable doubt that even without the possibly prejudicial effect of the disguise, the jury would have delivered a guilty verdict.
The court issued a subsequent related opinion or order on March 29, 2013.
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.