USA v. Valentin-Vega et al

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF PUERTO RICO
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v.
[2] RAFAEL A. RUIZ-
GARCÉS,
Defendant
CRIM. NO. 26-186-2 (RAM)
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
RAÚL M. ARIAS-MARXUACH, United States District Judge
Pending before the Court is Plaintiff United States of
America’s (the “Government”) Motion Requesting Order Deeming
Unmeritorious Defendant’s Accusation of False Statements Provided
by the United States (“Motion”). (Docket No. 243). For the reasons
set forth below, the Court GRANTS the Motion.
I. BACKGROUND
On May 15, 2026, Magistrate Judge Marcos E. López held a
detention hearing as to Defendant Rafael A. Ruiz-Garcés (Docket
No. 170). During that hearing, the Government proffered that of
six firearms found at Defendant’s residence, one was not registered
to him but rather to one named Juan Colón. (Docket No. 175 at 21).
The Government further posited that, “[s]o, someone who we have no
indication to know of any sort of relation to Mr. Ruiz Garces but
he just had in his house in Puerto Rico, he had five firearms that
were under his name . . . but that he also has a firearm in his
Case 3:26-cr-00186-RAM Document 255 Filed 10/13/26 Page 1 of 3

Criminal No. 26-186-2 (RAM) 2
house registered to some other person.” Id. at 21-22. In response,
the Magistrate Judge asked, “[d]o you know who that other person
is? You have a name but you don’t know the relationship. Okay.”
Id. at 22. The Government explained in the Motion that it then
continued proffering at the end of the hearing that “there were
six firearms, one of which was registered to some other person
whose relation we don’t even know to this defendant and I’ve heard
no proffers to why that firearm was in his house.” (Docket No. 243
at 5-6).
In a later filing, Defendant averred that these statements
were false and that “the Government’s own agents knew the truth
when they were made,” because the Government had identified Mr.
Colón and later heard why Mr. Colón’s firearm was at the
Defendant’s home from Mr. Colón himself. (Docket No. 238 at 17).
The Government now moves this Court to hold the Defendant’s
accusation that the Government provided false statements to the
Court meritless. (Docket No. 243 at 8).
II. DISCUSSION
The Government avers that its comment regarding “no known
relation” was intended to mean that there was no known “familial
relationship” between Mr. Colón and Defendant to explain why Mr.
Colón’s firearm was at Defendant’s home, not that there was no
known relation in any way to Mr. Colón. (Docket No. 243 at 3).
Case 3:26-cr-00186-RAM Document 255 Filed 10/13/26 Page 2 of 3

Criminal No. 26-186-2 (RAM) 3
Moreover, the Government argues that its comment regarding having
heard “no proffers to why that firearm was in his house” was meant
to be in reference to the lack of a proffer from defense counsel
as to why the firearm was in Defendant’s residence. Id. Lastly,
the Government explains that it does not find Mr. Colón’s story to
be credible and thus does not credit it as a fact providing
sufficient assurances of a relation to Defendant. Id. at 5-6
(discussing the Report of Investigation (ROI)).
This Court thus finds that the Government’s explanation of
its statement is sufficient for the Court to determine that there
was no attempt at misrepresentation by Counsel during the hearing
before the Magistrate on May 15, 2026. While the ROI provides a
seemingly innocuous but irresponsible reason for why Mr. Colón
left the firearm at Defendant’s residence, the Government was not
bound to credit it.
III. CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, the Government’s Motion Requesting
Order Deeming Unmeritorious Defendant’s Accusation of False
Statements Provided by the United States is GRANTED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
In San Juan, Puerto Rico, this 13th day of October 2026.
s/Raúl M. Arias-Marxuach_________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Case 3:26-cr-00186-RAM Document 255 Filed 10/13/26 Page 3 of 3