A last-minute defense filing lands the day before oral argument on a motion that could cut the charges against Christian Emmanuel Sanon nearly in half.
The docket in USA v. Palacios Palacios, et al. added one new filing as of September 28, 2026, and it’s a procedural but notable one heading into next week’s pivotal hearing.
The New Filing
On September 28, defense counsel Zeljka Bozanic filed a Motion to Bring Electronic Equipment into the Courtroom by Investigator on Christian Emmanuel Sanon’s behalf, with a proposed order attached. Responses are due by October 13, 2026. It’s a routine logistical motion on its face — the kind of filing that typically clears the way for a defense investigator to use laptops, recording devices, or presentation equipment during proceedings — but its timing, filed just one day before oral argument on a much bigger motion, suggests the defense is actively preparing evidentiary or demonstrative materials for next week’s hearing.
What It’s Building Toward
That hearing is the one to watch. Judge Jacqueline Becerra has set oral argument for September 29, 2026, at 8:30 a.m. in Courtroom 11-4 at the Wilkie D. Ferguson Jr. Courthouse, on Sanon’s motion to dismiss Counts 6 through 10 of the Sixth Superseding Indictment as barred by the statute of limitations. Given that those five counts make up more than half the charges Sanon currently faces, a ruling in his favor would substantially reshape the case against him — making Tuesday’s argument the most consequential moment in his proceedings since the new indictment was filed.
Five of nine counts turn on a single statute-of-limitations argument — the kind of motion that rarely makes headlines until the moment it decides half a case.
Where Things Stood Going In
The September 28 filing follows directly on the heels of Judge Becerra’s September 25 omnibus order, which resolved twelve pending motions from the September 24 hearing with a genuinely mixed record for the defense.
Favored Sanon
Motions to exclude late-produced medical education records and late-produced college records were both granted outright; his motion to strike surplusage from the indictment was granted without prejudice, as was his motion to strike photographs embedded directly in the indictment; and his motion to compel Brady material, co-defendant statements, and grand jury testimony was granted in part.
Against Sanon
His omnibus motion demanding the government proceed to trial on the earlier Fifth Superseding Indictment — or hand over an unredacted Sixth Superseding Indictment, or grant a 30-day continuance — was denied outright, as was his request for a formal bill of particulars.
As a result of the surplusage ruling, the government has been ordered to prepare a redacted and/or modified version of the Sixth Superseding Indictment for review by both the defense and the court — a document that, once filed, will effectively become the operative charging instrument going forward.
The Bottom Line
With the government still owing the court a revised indictment, and the defense now moving to bring equipment into the courtroom just before Tuesday’s statute-of-limitations argument, the case is entering a short but high-stakes stretch. A win for Sanon on the Counts 6-10 dismissal motion would cut the current indictment roughly in half; a loss keeps the full slate of charges — and the underlying material-support and conspiracy allegations tied to the 2021 assassination of President Jovenel Moïse — intact heading toward trial.
