With trial approaching, the case against Christian Emmanuel Sanon — known in Haiti as the self-declared “Mr. President” contender whose ambitions prosecutors allege helped set the July 2021 assassination of Jovenel Moïse in motion — has moved through an intense run of pretrial litigation over the past month, culminating in a marathon two-hour hearing and a dozen rulings from U.S. District Judge Jacqueline Becerra.

The New Indictment

On September 22, 2026, prosecutors filed the Sixth Superseding Redacted Indictment with Forfeiture Allegations, adding Sanon alongside 24 other defendants, including alleged plot organizer Joseph Félix Badio and fugitive Kraze Baryè gang leader Vitel’Homme Innocent. Sanon was arraigned on the new indictment on September 21 before Magistrate Judge Lisette M. Reid, facing counts 1, 2, 3, and 6 through 10. The court granted a standing discovery order and, as in earlier arraignments in this sprawling case, reaffirmed the government’s Brady obligations to disclose exculpatory evidence, warning that failures to do so could trigger sanctions ranging from evidence exclusion to dismissal of charges.

A Blitz of Defense Motions

Sanon’s defense team — led by Humberto Rolando Dominguez and Zeljka Bozanic — filed an unusually dense wave of motions in the days surrounding the new indictment, seeking to:

  • Dismiss the Sixth Superseding Indictment outright, and separately move to dismiss Counts 6 through 10 specifically as time-barred under the statute of limitations;
  • Strike “surplusage” from the indictment under Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 7(d) and demand a bill of particulars under Rule 7(f);
  • Strike photographs embedded directly in the indictment itself, arguing they exceed what the rules permit in a charging document;
  • Exclude several categories of late-produced government discovery, including medical education records, college records, and other “newly produced discovery”;
  • Compel production of Brady material, co-defendants’ statements, and grand jury testimony; and
  • Push back against the government’s use of phone extractions from two individuals identified as Helen Manich and Robert Balthazar.

The government, for its part, filed exhibit and witness lists, notices of intent to use business records and self-authenticating records (spanning at least 24 separate exhibits), and opposition briefs to nearly every defense motion.

What the Court Decided on September 24

At a two-hour omnibus hearing on September 24, Judge Becerra ruled on twelve pending motions simultaneously. The results were mixed for the defense:

Wins for Sanon: The court granted his motions to exclude the late-produced medical education records and the late-produced college records outright, and granted without prejudice his motions to strike surplusage from the indictment and to strike the embedded photographs — meaning prosecutors must now prepare a redacted or modified version of the indictment for the defense and the court to review. His motion to compel Brady material and co-defendant statements was granted in part.

Losses for Sanon: The government’s motion to admit “inextricably intertwined evidence” was granted. Sanon’s bid to preserve objections to the government introducing phone extractions from Manich and Balthazar was denied outright. His omnibus motion demanding the government proceed to trial on the earlier Fifth Superseding Indictment — or receive an unredacted copy of the Sixth and a 30-day continuance — was denied. His request for a formal bill of particulars was denied alongside the surplusage ruling.

Notably, the defense withdrew its own motion seeking to introduce co-conspirators’ phones, which the court accordingly denied as moot.

What’s Next

The most significant unresolved issue is Sanon’s motion to dismiss Counts 6 through 10 as barred by the statute of limitations — a potentially case-altering argument given that those five counts make up more than half the charges against him in the new indictment. Judge 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 in Miami, a hearing that will be closely watched given how much of the current charging document it could unravel if the defense prevails.

With that argument just days away and a redacted indictment still pending from the government, Sanon’s case remains in active, contested pretrial posture even as several co-defendants in the broader conspiracy — including those flown from Haiti last week — move toward their own separate proceedings.