An interesting sequence of events.
As highlighted in this prior post, in September 2025 a jury found Carl Zaglin guilty of FCPA and related offenses for his role in bribery schemes involving Honduran government officials to secure contracts to provide uniforms and other goods to the Honduran National Police.
In December 2025, Zaglin was sentenced to 8 years in prison. (See here).
Shortly thereafter, Zaglin filed a Second Motion for a New Trial asserting that a co-Defendant Aldo Nestor Marchena (Marchena) testified falsely against him in his trial. In connection with the same core action, Marchena had previosuly pleaded guilty and following the Zaglin trial, the DOJ filed a motion for departure seeking a 40% reduction in Marchena’s sentence for providing substantial cooperation.
Zaglin’s motion asserts that from October 2024 through his trial in September 2025, Marchena was held in custody at a Federal Detention Center (FDC) in Miami and that while in custody at FDC Miami, Marchena spoke with another inmate, Danny Rodriguez, concerning Marchena’s legal matters.
The motion is supported by an affidavit from Rodriguez stating that Marchena told Rodriguez that he was going to testify at the Zaglin trial and said “I am going to lie on an old fucking Jew” and that Marchena justified what he told Rodriguez that he was going to do by saying “I’m going home, fuck it.”
According to the Rodriguez affidavit, at the time he did not know which case Marchena was referring to and it was only after Zaglin was sentenced and became an inmate at FDC-Miami that he made the “connection” between Marchena’s statement and Zaglin’s trial.
The DOJ responded to Zaglin’s motion by stating:
“The Court should deny the motion in its entirety for three reasons. First, the affiant is a serial offender with a long history of making misstatements in this District Court, whose vague statements related to this case should not be credited. Second, the purported new evidence amounts, at best, to immaterial and cumulative impeachment testimony, which cannot be the basis for a new trial. And third, the supposed evidence would probably not produce a different outcome at a new trial in light of the significant evidence of the defendant’s guilt established through multiple other witnesses, documents, and recordings of Zaglin.”
The DOJ further stated:
“On January 5, 2026, the government interviewed Marchena about the claims in the Affidavit. Marchena acknowledged having exercised with Rodriguez while incarcerated in FDC Miami. Marchena denied ever discussing his case with Rodriguez and specifically denied making the statements attributed to him in the Affidavit. Marchena maintained that he has been truthful when speaking to the government, during his testimony at Zaglin’s trial, and at his sentencing.”
The DOJ stated: “it appears that Rodriguez fabricated a story about a government cooperator out of spite and to seek revenge against the government for perceived injustices, and chose to use the most inflammatory language possible.”
With an April 17th hearing approaching on Zaglin’s motion for a new trial, Zaglin also recently moved the Court to issue a Writ of Habeas Corpus ad testificandum to the United States Marshals Service to produce Danny Rodriguez on April 17th to be called as a witness for Zaglin.
Earlier this week, Judge Jacqueline Becerra (S.D. Fla). granted the writ.
