HEADNOTE: Mario Rodriguez Gutierrez v. State of Maryland, No. 98 ...

MS-13 undercurrent heightened the probative value of Norris’s testimony such that it was
not outweighed by any unfair prejudice. With regard to four of the five statements
challenged by Gutierrez on appeal, we find no error in this decision. First, Norris’s
discussion of the Spanish name of “MS-13,” including his comment that the “13” denoted
a tie to the Mexican Mafia, explained why Gutierrez’s “Mara Salvatrucha” declaration
indicated MS-13 loyalties. Second, Norris’s description of the process of “jumping in” as
a 13-second beating corroborates Tirado’s grand jury testimony that this seemingly senseless
shooting was really Gutierrez’s attempt to join MS-13. Third, his testimony that MS-13
members respond to insults with punishment “up to death” was relevant following testimony
that Gutierrez fired four shots after being insulted. The average person would not react to
a simple affront in such a brutal manner, and Norris’s opinion shed light on this otherwise
“inexplicable act.” See Bryant, 609 N.E.2d at 920. We reach the same conclusion with
respect to Norris’s fourth statement, that gang members also respond to “false flagging” with
violence up to death, because “false flagging” is an insult to the exclusivity and hierarchy of
the gang. Ultimately, we do not see how Gutierrez was unfairly prejudiced by this evidence,
and thus, the trial court did not abuse its discretion when permitting the jury to hear and
consider it.
We are in agreement with Gutierrez, however, that the trial court erred in allowing
Norris to comment that MS-13 is the gang that law enforcement “had seen the most violence
with recently for the past four, four and a half years in this region.” The fact that one gang
is generally more violent than others does little to add to the jury’s understanding of why the
21