Junior Maldonado's murder retrial continues despite a judge's ruling that Nassau prosecutors withheld evidence

The Nassau County District Attorney’s Office once again withheld evidence in the retrial of a Hempstead man in a 2020 killing, a Nassau judge ruled on Tuesday, four months after the man’s murder conviction was overturned by the same judge because prosecutors failed to turn over similar evidence in the first trial.

Defense lawyer Jason Russo, who represents Junior Maldonado in the second trial for the shooting death of Alexis Gonzalez-Sanchez, 27, during a party in a Westbury parking lot called it “trial by ambush” and asked Supreme Court Justice Helene Gugerty during a contentious morning hearing to order a mistrial and bar prosecutors from bringing the case again.

Gugerty determined that prosecutors violated their legal obligation by withholding the fact that the key witness in the case, Jerry Navarette, had been promised reward money in return for information and testimony that led to the conviction of Maldonado, 20.

“The court finds that this is a clear violation,” Gugerty said after hearing heated arguments from the defense and prosecution over a mistrial motion. “This additional failure to disclose is extremely troubling,” she said.

Gugerty refused to order a mistrial or strike Navarette’s testimony as Russo requested.

Instead, she allowed the defense lawyer additional time to interview Navarette to prepare for his cross-examination and informed the jury that the delay in the case was due to the prosecutors.

Maldonado, of Hempstead, was 16 years old when he was arrested on a charge of killing Gonzalez-Sanchez in August 2020.

According to court papers, Gonzalez-Sanchez and some friends gathered at a party in a parking lot on Union Avenue where about 40 people were drinking and listening to music.

A group of unknown, uninvited partygoers arrived, sparking multiple fights between the groups.

During one of the melees, a young man sporting a “mushroom shape” haircut started waving a handgun around and threatening the rival group not to come closer, according to court papers.

Navarette, who said he was sober because his wife did not like him to drink, testified that he tried to get his spouse out of the line of fire when he heard two shots and saw the victim on the ground with two gunshot wounds to the face.

The witness also identified Maldonado in a police photo array, according to prosecutors.

Over the course of the preparation for the March 2023 trial, Navarette told prosecutors that his girlfriend was pregnant and wanted to know about a $5,000 reward that was offered for his testimony.

Prosecutors originally believed that he had seen the reward offered on a CrimeStoppers poster.

On the day that the jury convicted Maldonado in February 2023, Navarette spoke to the lead assistant district attorney on the case, Kirk Sendlein, asking again about the reward money, according to the prosecution. At that point, the prosecutor said he realized that this information should have been disclosed before trial under the Brady rule, which requires negative information regarding a witness to be shared with the defense lawyer.

During the second trial, Navarette told the jury that a Spanish-speaking detective spoke to him in the hospital on the night of the shooting and told him that he was eligible for the reward in exchange for information and testimony that led to a conviction, according to information at the hearing.

The judge ruled that prosecutors had the information a week before the testimony in the trial started on Monday but did not disclose it to the defense lawyer.

“This information was never disclosed,” Gugerty said.

Under the New York State discovery law, prosecutors must turn over “a summary of all promises, rewards and inducements made to, or in favor of, persons who may be called as witnesses, as well as requests for consideration by persons who may be called as witnesses and copies of all documents relevant to a promise, reward or inducement.” 

Assistant District Attorneys Stefanie Palma and Veronica Guariglia argued that they had fulfilled their legal obligation in the case by providing a summary of information.

The judge disagreed.

“The court rejects the characterization that a summary was turned over,” Gugerty said. She added, “It’s not the defense counsel’s burden to find out everything that your witness knows, it’s your obligation to turn it over.”

Russo said that he would continue to prepare for his cross-examination.

“It's disheartening,” he said after the hearing. “The judge found my argument credible, I only hoped that she sent a louder message to the DA's office.”

The morning hearing got contentious at times with prosecutors accusing Russo of performing for the gallery and the defense lawyer accusing prosecutors of “suborning perjury, or coming close.”

“I think my ethics speak for themselves,” Palma said. “I won’t speak to Mr. Russo’s comments because I think they’re ridiculous.”

At times both the defense lawyer and the prosecutors stood speaking at the same time as the families of Maldonado and Gonzalez-Sanchez watched from the gallery.

The repeated mistake from prosecutors raises questions regarding procedures at the district attorney’s office, according to Ellen Yaroshefsky, professor of legal ethics at Hofstra University.

“It’s very disturbing,” she said. “The office should get to the bottom of this and figure out why it happened at all and then why it happened twice.” 

The Nassau County District Attorney's Office said that it provides all prosecutors with continuing education on the discovery rules.

“NCDA takes our ethical responsibilities very seriously and provides comprehensive continuing legal training to our assistant district attorneys on our discovery obligations,” spokeswoman Nicole Turso said in an email.