United States v. Richard Garza

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit
DecidedDecember 9, 2025
Docket24-2288
StatusPublished

This text of United States v. Richard Garza (United States v. Richard Garza) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Richard Garza, (8th Cir. 2025).

Opinion

United States Court of Appeals For the Eighth Circuit ___________________________

No. 24-2288 ___________________________

United States of America

Plaintiff - Appellee

v.

Richard Garza

Defendant - Appellant ____________

Appeal from United States District Court for the District of Nebraska - Lincoln ____________

Submitted: October 20, 2025 Filed: December 9, 2025 [Published] ____________

Before COLLOTON, Chief Judge, LOKEN and BENTON, Circuit Judges. ____________

PER CURIAM.

A jury convicted Richard G. Garza of tampering with a witness, in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1512(b)(1) and 1512(j). The district court 1 sentenced him to 66

1 The Honorable John M. Gerrard, United States District Court Judge for the District of Nebraska. months in prison. He appeals his conviction. Having jurisdiction under, 28 U.S.C. § 1291, this court affirms.

Garza argues the evidence was insufficient to convict him of attempting to persuade Katrina Coffman to testify falsely on his behalf. The district court denied Garza’s motion for judgment of acquittal on this ground. This court reviews “the denial of a motion for judgment of acquittal de novo, viewing the evidence and all reasonable inferences in the light most favorable to the jury’s verdict.” United States v. Plume, 110 F.4th 1130, 1133 (8th Cir. 2024). A judgment of acquittal is appropriate “only when no reasonable jury could have found the defendant guilty beyond a reasonable doubt.” Id.

In March 2022, a federal indictment charged Garza with one count of conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and (b)(1). In April 2023, a superseding indictment added two new counts of witness tampering. One of those counts charged:

On or between about May 6, 2022, and June 29, 2022, in the District of Nebraska, RICHARD GARZA, the defendant herein, did corruptly persuade or attempt to corruptly persuade K.C. with the intent to influence the testimony of K.C. in the trial of a criminal case.

In violation of Title 18 United States Code, Sections 1512(b)(l) and 1521(j). 2

The jury heard substantial evidence of Garza’s attempt to influence Coffman’s testimony. Coffman testified for the government at trial. Before they were both incarcerated, Coffman met Garza through Jaesa Vaughn and her father Roger, both of whom sold drugs with Garza. After Coffman and Garza were incarcerated, she received a letter from him thanking her “for not lying on him.” They began to

2 There was an error in the indictment, listing a violation of 18 U.S.C. § 1521(j) rather than 18 U.S.C. § 1512(j). -2- communicate with each other through a “chirp” account, a text messaging service for inmates. In these messages, Garza offered to help Coffman:

If I get out after my trial I promise you I will do everything I can to help you and your family, including your husband if he accepts my friendship.

****

There is a lot I would like to talk about w/ you but under these circumstances its difficult and I know you understand me. For now we’ll play it safe and wait.

Ok thank you so much and I am forever grateful to you. Im still gonna try to put money on your chirp bcs I know how it is when you want or need to text.

I wish I could transfer from mine bcs I have 100 but either way you’ll have me as your friend forever and I will do everything and anything to help you.

Coffman testified that Garza said he would have his brother transfer money into her “chirp” account and that he talked about wanting to transfer money from his account to hers. Garza allowed Coffman to use his phone account for free. In one message he said: “Ok you forgot to tell me your lawyers name and if you need to use my phone u can I have like 20 bucks on it its 6547 #4263 and you can use it all I have more.” A few days later he said: “Dont worry about using phone time, that’s what it’s for I hardly use it, and when it runs out ill put more.” He bought commissary items for her, saying: “Tomorrow i get more commissary ill see or figure out how to send my niece some food lol . . . I have right now 2 soups a beef and cheese stick and a cocoa drink and tea for u right now but dont know how to get it to you bcs this shift is scary besides.” -3- In many messages to Coffman, he reminded her of the favors he provided:

They are pointing the finger on me of what i did in the 1990’s im doing w/ all of that dont understand it but God knows why. I guess my cuz did anything.

And everything to get time off and they plotted against me to make themselves look good. But oh now i got you to expose them and i hope the judge sees that.

Take care sobrina and i hope you enjoy what i sent you and hope to meet you one day. Take care of your family, stay in touch w/ them you got phone time tomorrow.

Ill send the other stuff i ordered for you. Let me know what happens and stay in touch. I cant wait to go back to work, im a work aholic cant stand this.

When asked what she understood Garza expected in return for these favors, Coffman testified, “To basically lie for him.” She understood he wanted her to contradict the testimony of Roger and Jaesa about his involvement in selling drugs.

Q. Did he want you testify for him in this case? A. Yes. Q. And did he ask you to testify on his behalf? A. Yes. Q. And did he ask you to lie about some information? A. He didn’t ask me to lie about no information. Q. But did he ask you to tell the jury that other people had lied about information? A. Yes.

-4- Q. And would that be Roger and Jaesa? A. Yes. Q. And the information that he wanted you to talk about, was it information that you had any independent knowledge of? A. No. Q. Okay. Did he want you to say that things that Roger and Jaesa had said about him, Mr. Garza, were lies? A. Yes. Q. But you would have no independent knowledge of that; is that fair? A. Right. Q. Did Mr. Garza ask you to say you were the only source for Roger Vaughn? A. No. Q. Did he ask you to say that you were one of Roger Vaughn’s sources? A. Yes. Q. And that Mr. Garza was not? A. Yes. Q. Now, you didn’t know independently whether Mr. Garza was a source for Roger Vaughn or not, did you? A. Correct. Q. So that wasn’t something you could actually truthfully testify about? A. Right.

Garza also asked Coffman to contact her lawyer saying she wanted to testify on his behalf. Garza told her what to say, maintaining that Roger and Jaesa were lying about their involvement with him:

My atty is setting that up, you are going to testify on my behalf from what I understand. My atty will be here this weekend, youll see me pass by ill know 4sho.

As far as I know you are bcs I need you to tell them the truth, you know first hand that they set me up bcs they want time off their sentence and you my witness.

-5- In other conversations, Garza said that he had told his attorney that Coffman would provide testimony helpful to his case:

Went well with my visit he will be here again tomorrow and he will contact your atty and wonders if you got anything helpful that would be helpful for me I said.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. Alfred M. Craft
478 F.3d 899 (Eighth Circuit, 2007)
United States v. Kimo Little Bird, Sr.
76 F.4th 758 (Eighth Circuit, 2023)
United States v. Roylee Richardson
92 F.4th 728 (Eighth Circuit, 2024)
United States v. Gabriel White Plume, Sr.
110 F.4th 1130 (Eighth Circuit, 2024)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
United States v. Richard Garza, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-richard-garza-ca8-2025.