Jose Louis Nazario Jr. v United States of America

Court	United States District Court Central District of California, United States
Case number	EDCR 07-00127-(A) SGL
Decision title	Judgment of Discharge
Decision date	28 August 2008
Parties	Jose Louis Nazario Jr. United States of America
Categories	War crimes
Keywords	manslaughter, Murder, right to a fair trial, war crimes
Links	Judgment of Discharge

Summary

On 9 November 2004, Jose Louis Nazario Jr. was serving in Iraq as a member of the US Armed Forces. Nazario was leading a squad of 13 Marines on house-to-house searches. During these searches, Nazario allegedly killed two Iraqis, and encouraged two squad members to shoot two others. The alleged acts took place in Fallujah, Iraq.

In 2007, Jose Louis Nazario was brought before the US District Court in California. He was the first veteran to be tried in a civilian US court for alleged war crimes in Iraq.

The defence argued that there was no evidence of a deceased person, nor had the government provided a name or a sufficient description of any of the alleged victims. Deliberating in less than six hours, the jury found Nazario not guilty of manslaughter or assault. Jose Louis Nazario Jr. was acquitted on all charges on 28 August 2008.

Procedural history

16 August 2007: US District Court for the Central District of California, Redacted Complaint, Case No. ED 07-244M;

04 September 2007: US District Court for the Central District of California, Indictment, Case No. CR07-00127-SGL;

26 September 2007: US District Court for the Central District of California, Findings and Order, Case No. CR07-00127-SGL;

31 October 2007: US District Court for the Central District of California, Findings and Order, Case No. CR07-00127-SGL;

21 November 2007: US District Court Central District of California – Eastern Division, Notice of Motion and Motion for Discovery, Case No. ED CR 07-127 SGL;

03 December 2007: US District Court for the Central District of California, Opposition to Motion for Discovery, Case No. ED CR 07-127-SGL;

04 March 2008: US District Court for the Central District of California, Criminal Standing Order, Case No. CR 07-127-SGL;

28 March 2008: US District Court Central District of California – Eastern Division, Notice of Motion and Motion to Dismiss the Indictment for Failure to Invoke the Court’s Jurisdiction or to State an Offense, Case No. ED CR 07-127 SGL;

11 April 2008: US District Court for the Central District of California, Opposition to Motion to Dismiss for Failure to Invoke the Court’s Jurisdiction or to State an Offense, Case No. ED CR 07-127-SGL;

16 June 2006: US District Court for the Central District of California, Government’s Motions in Limine: Declaration of Jerry A. Behnke, Case No. ED CR 07-127-SGL;

16 June 2008: US District Court for the Central District of California, Order Allowing Disclosure of Grand Jury Testimony, Case No. ED CR 07-127-SGL;

09 July 2008: US District Court for the Central District of California, First Superseding Indictment, Case No. ED CR 07-127(A)-SGL;

13 August 2008: US District Court for the Central District of California, Government’s Proposed Jury Instruction, Case No. ED CR 07-127(A) SGL;

13 August 2008: US District Court for the Central District of California, Government’s Trial Memorandum, Case No. ED CR 07-127(A)-SGL;

18 August 2008: US District Court, District of California – Eastern Division, Motion in Limine Re Weemer’s Polygraph Interview, Case No. ED CR 07-127 SGL;

20 August 2008: US District Court for the Central District of California, Opposition to Defendant’s Motion in Limine Re Weemer’s Polygraph Interview, Case No. ED CR 07-127 SGL;

21 August 2008: US District Court for Central District of California, Order Granting Defendant’s Motion in Limine Excluding Prior Statements of Ryan Weemer, Case No. ED CR 07-00127 SGL;

25 August 2008: US District Court, Central District of California – Eastern Division, Motion for Judgment of Acquittal, Case no ED CR 07-127 SGL

28 August 2008: US District Court Central District of California, Judgment of Discharge, Case No. EDCR 07-001270(A) SGL.

Related developments

23 september 2008: Government Drops Contempt Charges Against Sergeants Weemer and Nelson;

25 April 2009: Case against Sgt. Jermain Nelson will not be dropped;

In 2010, Nazario sued the city of Riverside, California after his acquittal, for failing to rehire him to the police force.

Legally relevant facts

On or about 9 November 2004, Jose Nazario was a member of the Armed Forces subject to Chapter 47 of Title 10 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice of the United States and Nazario was leading a squad of 13 mariners (indictment, p. 1);

Jose Nazario has been charged with manslaughter and assault with a deadly weapon (Motion for judgment of acquittal, paragraph I);

The acts the suspect has been charged with occurred in Fallujah, Iraq (indictment, paragraph 1);

It is alleged that on or about 9 November 2004 in Fallujah Iraq, the defendant knowingly used and carried a firearm during and in relation to, and possessed that firearm in furtherance of, a crime of violence, namely, voluntary manslaughter, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 1112, 3261(a)(2), 2(b) and assault with a dangerous weapon with intent to do bodily harm, in violation of Title 18, United States Code, Sections 113(A)(3), 3261(a)(2), (9b) and, in so doing, discharged that firearm (first superseding indictment p. 5 and 6).

Core legal questions

Has the US Government introduced sufficient evidence to prosecute the defendant with manslaughter and assault (a.o. Motion for judgment of acquittal p. 1-2)?
Has the Government failed to prove that any of the alleged victims are actually deceased (Motion for judgment of acquittal p. 2)?

Specific legal rules and provisions

Sections 1112, 3261(a)(2), 2(b) (1112: Manslaughter, 3261(a)(2): Criminal offenses committed by certain members of the Armed Forces and by persons employed by or accompanying the Armed Forces outside the United States) of Title 18 of the US Code.
US 2000 Military Extraterritorial Jurisdiction Act.

Court's holding and analysis

The defendant is discharged on all pending counts of the Indictment First Superseding for the reason that the jury has returned its verdict, finding the defendant not guilty and for ‘other reasons’ (Judgment of discharge p. 1).