Judges hear appeal in Weslaco bribery case

McALLEN, Texas ( ValleyCentral ) — The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals heard oral arguments Tuesday in a Hidalgo County corruption case.

Federal prosecutors accused former Hidalgo County Commissioner Arturo “A.C.” Cuellar Jr. of accepting nearly $1.4 million to improperly influence his cousin, Weslaco City Commissioner John Cuellar.

A.C. Cuellar denied any wrongdoing. After a two-week trial, however, a jury found A.C. Cuellar guilty on bribery, money laundering and wire fraud charges.

U.S. District Judge Micaela Alvarez sentenced A.C. Cuellar to 20 years in prison. A businessman charged in the case, Ricardo “Rick” Quintanilla, was sentenced to nearly 17 years.

A.C. Cuellar and Quintanilla appealed, claiming Alvarez failed to recuse herself from the case after questions surfaced about her impartiality. They also challenged the admission of a video recorded by a government informant and other decisions Alvarez made during the trial.

Judges heard oral arguments in the case Tuesday morning in New Orleans.

They had questions about several issues, including the argument that Alvarez failed to recuse herself.

Alvarez filed a lawsuit against J-III Trucking, a company that A.C. Cuellar owned, after a car crash in January 2015. J-III Trucking and the company’s insurance carrier settled the lawsuit for $60,000.

In 2019, when a grand jury indicted A.C. Cuellar, the case was assigned to Alvarez.

A.C. Cuellar asked Alvarez to recuse herself, concerned the lawsuit created “a conflict of interest or at a minimum the appearance of partiality,” according to a motion filed by his attorney.

Alvarez denied the motion.

“The prior state civil lawsuit, a civil action completely unrelated to the instant federal criminal case, has been resolved for over three years,” according to an order Alvarez signed in 2019. “Resolution is the opposite of conflict.”

A judge asked Assistant U.S. Attorney Renata Gowie about the issue Tuesday.

“No reasonable person with knowledge of the circumstances would harbor any doubt about Judge Alvarez’s impartiality,” Gowie said. “The recusal motion was based on an unremarkable insurance settlement from an auto accident that was between an employee of J-III Trucking, the truck driver, and the judge in her personal capacity.”

Alvarez also made rulings that raised questions about whether she could remain impartial, according to a brief filed by A.C. Cuellar’s attorneys.

“It’s clear from the case law that judicial criticism, comments, rulings are not enough to show bias unless it rises to the level of a deep-seated antagonism,” Gowie said.

Attorney Cynthia Orr of San Antonio, who represents A.C. Cuellar, said bias wasn’t the issue.

“It was never alleged that Judge Alvarez was biased,” Orr said, adding that the issue remained: “An appearance that would cause the public to question the propriety of this judge proceeding in the case under the appropriate standard.”

Quintanilla and A.C. Cuellar also challenged the court’s decision to allow jurors to watch a video recorded by a government informant.

The informant, Leonel J. Lopez Jr. of Rio Grande City, pleaded guilty to bribery in 2019. As part of his plea, Lopez admitted that he accepted more than $4 million from engineering firms.

Lopez passed along part of the money to A.C. Cuellar and Quintanilla, who paid members of the Weslaco City Commission to approve contracts with the engineering firms.

After being confronted by federal agents, Lopez agreed to cooperate with the government. He recorded incriminating discussions with Quintanilla and City Commissioner Gerardo “Jerry” Tafolla.

Lopez died in 2020, which prevented attorneys for A.C. Cuellar and Quintanilla from questioning him about the recordings.

“If able to cross-examine Lopez, the defendants would have been able to question Lopez’s credibility given the pressure on him to plead guilty and prevent his dying wife from being charged, as well as his inconsistent statements,” according to the brief filed by attorneys for A.C. Cuellar and Quintanilla.

A judge wanted to know whether attorneys had objected to the admission of Quintanilla’s own statements in the video or simply the comments Lopez made.

“I don’t believe there was the specific delineation of what specific comments were being objected to,” said attorney Walter Reaves of Waco, who represents Quintanilla. “The argument was more directed at the fact that Mr. Lopez, obviously, was no longer available to testify.”

Gowie, the attorney for the government , said the recordings were admissible because the “integrated, reciprocal conversations” put Quintanilla’s statements in context.

Reaves also challenged how Alvarez calculated Quintanilla’s sentence.

The case involved over $4 million in bribe money, but Quintanilla received less than $100,000.

“With that, the sentence just becomes extremely disproportionate to what was actually received,” Reaves said.

Gowie said the court had cut Quintanilla a break.

“The loss amount was estimated to be over $10 million but could not be determined at the time of sentencing. The benefit would have been, possibly, the value of these contracts, the $42.5 million,” Gowie said. “Instead the court went with, actually, the lesser amount, which is the value of payments, the $4.1 million in bribes that Lopez received.”

The judges didn’t decide on Tuesday. They may take months to issue an opinion.

For the latest news, weather, sports, and streaming video, head to KVEO-TV.