A Hayward man who claimed the government entrapped him into selling methamphetamine by exploiting his susceptibility to suggestion caused by a brain tumor deserves a new trial, a federal appeals court ruled Wednesday.

"Without the medical expert opinion testimony, the real issue in dispute was hidden from the jury," 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeal Judge Andrew Kleinfeld wrote for himself and circuit judges Alfred Goodwin and Diarmuid O'Scannlain. "It could not determine whether the government's informants induced a vulnerable and suggestible man to break the law."

Eduardo Sandoval-Mendoza and his twin brother, Ricardo, were convicted of conspiring to sell methamphetamine. Eduardo Sandoval-Mendoza was sentenced to 19 years and sevenmonths in federal prison, which he has been serving at Lompoc with a projected release date in 2020.

"Marcos," his sister's boyfriend, had introduced him to someone named "Tony" in February 2000; both Marcos and Tony were government informants, and Eduardo Sandoval-Mendoza sold about 12 pounds of methamphetamine to them in three separate deals.

He later claimed the informants knew he had been diagnosed eight years earlier with a large brain tumor that left him abnormally susceptible to suggestion, and that they pressured him for months to make these sales while preying upon his depression and fear.

"Sandoval-Mendoza's account is not entirely credible. On wiretap recordings he sounds suspiciously like an experienced

drug dealer, not a neophyte," the appeals court noted. "He testified that a relative, a fugitive drug dealer in Mexico, told him what to say and how to portray himself. This relative also connected him with suppliers in Los Angeles."

But U.S. District Saundra Brown Armstrong of Oakland excluded expert medical testimony Sandoval-Mendoza wanted to present to jurors "explaining that his large brain tumor damaged his intelligence, memory and judgment, making him especially susceptible to suggestion," Kleinfeld wrote.

"Sandoval-Mendoza's experts were well-qualified and had sufficient expertise in the neurology of brain tumors and his particular case to be useful to the jury," he wrote. "The district court's exclusion of medical expert opinion testimony prevented Sandoval-Mendoza from showing lack of predisposition," depriving him of a fair chance to defend himself.

Sandoval-Mendoza's attorney, Marc Zilversmit of San Francisco, said he's pleased: "It was a very conservative panel, so I think we're on very solid ground when they agree with a criminal defendant."

Contact Josh Richman at jrichman@angnewspapers.com or 208-6428.