USA v. Roybal

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
vs. No. CR 21-0863 JB
ORLANDO ROYBAL,
Defendant.
MEMORANDUM OPINION AND ORDER
THIS MATTER comes before the Court on the Letter from Orlando Roybal to the
Honorable James O. Browning (dated July 20, 2025), filed September 8, 2025 (Doc. 114)(“Post-
Judgment Letter”). Defendant Orlando Roybal is a federal prisoner at Victorville Medium
Federal Correctional Center in Victorville, California. See https://www.bop.gov/inmateloc/
(Federal Bureau of Prisons (“BOP”) Inmate Locator Website, last visited April 22, 2026). The
Post-Judgment Letter alleges that three individuals -- Tina Romero Sandoval, Felicia Roybal, and
Melissa Pacheco -- are working with federal authorities and putting Roybal’s life in danger. See
Post-Judgment Letter at 1. It is not clear what the relationships among O. Roybal and those
individuals is. See Post-Judgment Letter at 1. Sandoval, F. Roybal, and Pacheco allegedly are
“saying [O. Roybal’s] name,” and/or discussing his statements during trial, which makes him a
target within the BOP. Post-Judgment Letter at 1. The Post-Judgment Letter states that O.
Roybal emailed an unnamed Warden about the issue, but O. Roybal does not receive an adequate
response. See Post-Judgment Letter at 1.
The Post-Judgment Letter asks the Court to allow the United States of America to press
charges against Sandoval, F. Roybal, and Pacheco, and possibly to consider a claim regarding the
BOP’s alleged failure to protect O. Roybal in prison. See Post-Judgment Letter at 1. With
Case 1:21-cr-00863-JB Document 115 Filed 06/02/26 Page 1 of 2

- 2 -
respect to pressing charges, O. Roybal must contact law enforcement. The Court is not involved
with any decision to press charges; the State district attorney or the United States Attorney makes
that decision as part of the executive function. See Wayte v. United States, 470 U.S. 598, 607
(1985)(discussing factors that guide the Executive’s prosecutorial discretion). As to O. Roybal’s
safety and/or prison classification, he may raise that issue by filing a civil rights action in his
district of confinement rather than litigating in this District. See Palma-Salazar v. Davis, 677 F.3d
1031, 1035 (10th Cir. 2012). FCI Victorville is located in San Bernadino County, California,
within the United States District Court for the Central District of California, Eastern Division.
See 28 U.S.C. § 84(c)(noting “[t]he Central District [of California] comprises 3 divisions” and that
the “Eastern Division [of the Central District] comprises the counties of Riverside and San
Bernadino”).
For these reasons, the Court denies O. Roybal’s request in the Post-Judgment Letter, to the
extent O. Roybal seeks action from the Court. The denial is without prejudice, so O. Roybal
remains free to contact law enforcement or file a claim in the United States District Court for the
Central District of California, Eastern Division.
IT IS ORDERED that the requests in the Letter from Orlando Roybal to the Honorable
James O. Browning (dated July 20, 2025), filed September 8, 2025 (Doc. 114), are denied without
prejudice.
_________________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Parties:
Orlando Roybal
Defendant pro se
Case 1:21-cr-00863-JB Document 115 Filed 06/02/26 Page 2 of 2