Opinion
CRIMINAL RDB-21-00163
09-26-2022
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. BENJAMIN F. PAZ, Defendant.
MEMORANDUM ORDER
Richard D. Bennett, United States District Judge
Defendant Benjamin F. Paz (“Paz” or “Defendant”) has been charged in a one-count Indictment alleging unlawful procurement of citizenship or naturalization under 18 U.S.C. § 1425(a). (Indictment, ECF No. 1.) Now pending is Defendant's Motion in Limine “to Exclude Privileged Testimony of Defendant Benjamin Paz's Legal Representative” (ECF No. 64). The Court has considered the Government's Opposition (ECF No. 65) and held a telephone conference on the record on September 26, 2022. (ECF No. 67.) For the reasons stated on the record, and briefly reiterated below, Defendant's Motion is DENIED.
Defendant seeks to preclude the Government from eliciting testimony from Celia Rivas, an Accredited Representative under the Department of Justice's Recognition and Accreditation Program, concerning her conversations with Defendant Paz during his naturalization proceedings. (ECF No. 64.) Defendant further urges this Court to extend the attorney-client privilege to accredited representatives under Federal Rule of Evidence 501. Id. The Court declines to extend the attorney-client privilege to accredited representatives in the context here. First, there is no evidence on the record that Defendant believed Ms. Rivas was his legal counsel. Second, there is a dearth of legal authority, let alone precedent in this Circuit, that would move this Court to extend attorney-client privilege to protect communications with accredited representatives. Third, even if this Court extended such privilege, the Government clarified that it does not plan to inquire about Ms. Rivas' conversations with Defendant, but rather intends on asking Ms. Rivas about “matters that apply generally to the services she provides clients rather than to this specific Defendant.” (ECF No. 65 at 5.) Plainly, unless the evidence during trial otherwise opens the door to substantive conversations between Ms. Rivas and Defendant, the Court does not anticipate any so-called privileged information to be divulged anyway.
Defense counsel argued on the telephone conference, for the first time, that Defendant may have understood Ms. Rivas to be his counsel, as indicated on a waiver sheet in which Defendant signed that he “waived the right to have [his] attorney, CELIA ELIZABETH RIVAS, present at this interview.” However, this argument is juxtaposed by Exhibit 5 to Defendant's Motion (ECF No. 64) which indicates that Celia Rivas is not Defendant's attorney, but instead is an accredited representative.
Accordingly, IT IS, this 26th day of September, 2022, hereby ORDERED that Defendant's Motion in Limine “to Exclude Privileged Testimony of Defendant Benjamin Paz's Legal Representative” (ECF No. 64) is DENIED.