In November 2025, John Anthony Castro filed an emergency motion for mistrial, raising serious constitutional concerns about the conduct of the government during his prosecution. The motion alleged that federal prosecutors entered into undisclosed agreements with key witnesses — including criminal immunity arrangements — without notifying Castro or his defense team.
According to the filing, Castro and his attorneys were never given the opportunity to review or agree to critical stipulations presented during trial. In the government’s response, prosecutor Lauren Murphy acknowledged that Castro’s Sixth Amendment rights were violated because he was not afforded the opportunity to properly discuss or challenge those stipulations with witnesses.
Government Concessions
In its response filed on Thanksgiving, the government conceded that Castro’s Sixth Amendment rights were violated and acknowledged that evidence had been suppressed. However, the prosecution did not address allegations concerning a secret criminal immunity deal granted to witness Linda Rivera.
Castro’s legal team argues that by failing to respond to that issue in its 54-page response brief, the government effectively forfeited the argument. They maintain that the omission was deliberate, asserting that the prosecution avoided addressing the immunity agreement because doing so would further expose misconduct.
Motion for Release and Fifth Circuit Ruling
Following the government’s concession, Castro filed a motion for release, arguing that his conviction cannot stand where constitutional violations and undisclosed immunity agreements tainted the proceedings. He also alleged that witnesses were coerced into agreements that were never disclosed to the defense prior to conviction.
On December 8, the Fifth Circuit denied the motion for release. Castro contends that the appellate court declined to require a government response to certain issues — despite procedural rules mandating one — effectively shielding prosecutors from further admissions.
DOJ Developments
Stephen Gilstrap, Chief of the Appellate Division at the Department of Justice and reportedly involved in oversight of the case, resigned in December. Castro believes the resignation was connected to the controversy surrounding the prosecution.
Political Prisoner Claim
Castro has publicly stated that, in light of the constitutional violations now on record and the government’s concessions, his continued incarceration is political in nature. He asserts that his prosecution was retaliatory and that his imprisonment now rests on political grounds. He has indicated his intention to seek review beyond domestic courts, including potential appeals to international human rights bodies.
Recent Developments
After multiple delays, the Department of Justice has reportedly chosen not to contest certain aspects of the case and has declined to further defend or prosecute related matters, despite acknowledged constitutional violations — including alleged Fifth Amendment concerns.
Castro’s attorneys are preparing to file an expedited motion for default judgment, arguing that the government’s concessions warrant immediate relief and release. Additionally, Castro filed a writ of mandamus on Tuesday, seeking to compel lower courts to act and issue rulings on the pending matters.
Throughout this process, Castro has publicly stated that he remains prayerful and hopeful, maintaining faith despite the ongoing legal uncertainty.
The case now turns on whether the courts will grant relief in light of the government’s concessions and the unresolved questions surrounding undisclosed immunity agreements.
Case Update Summary: United States v. John Anthony Castro
Key Issues Raised:
- Alleged undisclosed criminal immunity agreement granted to witness Linda Rivera.
- Alleged coercion of witnesses into agreements.
- Presentation of stipulations without defendant’s informed agreement.
- Alleged suppression of evidence.
- Sixth Amendment violation conceded by government.
- Alleged Fifth Amendment violations.
Government Response:
- Prosecutor Lauren Murphy conceded Sixth Amendment violation (lack of opportunity to discuss stipulations with witnesses).
- Acknowledged suppression of evidence.
- Did not address alleged criminal immunity deal in 54-page brief.
Procedural History:
- Emergency motion for mistrial filed November 2025.
- Motion for release denied by Fifth Circuit on December 8.
- Writ of mandamus filed seeking to compel lower court action.
- Expedited motion for default ruling forthcoming.
Additional Development:
- Stephen Gilstrap, Chief of DOJ Appellate Division, resigned December 2025.
Current Status:
- Castro remains incarcerated in federal prison.
- Further appellate and extraordinary relief motions pending.
#freejohnanthonycastro
Submitted by Rev. Renaldo C. McKenzie, Editor-In-Chief at The Neoliberal
Make a one-time donation
Make a monthly donation
Make a yearly donation
Choose an amount
Or enter a custom amount
Your contribution is appreciated.
Your contribution is appreciated.
Your contribution is appreciated.
DonateDonate monthlyDonate yearly