United States v. Renteria , 96 F. App'x 949 ( 2004 )


Menu:
  •                                                        United States Court of Appeals
    Fifth Circuit
    F I L E D
    IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS          April 23, 2004
    FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
    Charles R. Fulbruge III
    Clerk
    No. 02-50509
    Summary Calendar
    UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
    Plaintiff-Appellee,
    versus
    FRANK RENTERIA,
    Defendant-Appellant.
    --------------------
    Appeal from the United States District Court
    for the Western District of Texas
    USDC No. W-98-CR-75-1
    --------------------
    Before BARKSDALE, EMILIO M. GARZA and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
    PER CURIAM:*
    Frank Renteria appeals from his jury-verdict conviction for
    conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine
    and conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute marijuana.
    He argues that:   (1) the jury instructions improperly conflated
    the intent elements for both conspiracy counts; (2) the evidence
    produced at trial was insufficient to support his conviction for
    the methamphetamine count; (3) the district court improperly
    influenced the jury’s verdict; and (4) the district court erred
    *
    Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined
    that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent
    except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.
    R. 47.5.4.
    No. 02-50509
    -2-
    by admitting an audio tape containing a telephone conversation
    between himself and an informant.
    As Renteria did not object to the jury instructions or
    submit a proposed jury instruction as to the intent element, this
    issue is reviewed only for plain error.   See United States v.
    Martin, 
    332 F.3d 827
    , 834 (5th Cir. 2003).   Examination of the
    jury instructions does not reveal plain error as to the intent
    element.   As Renteria did not move for a judgment of acquittal at
    the end of the Government’s case or at the close of all evidence,
    his challenge to the sufficiency of the evidence “is reviewed
    only to determine if the defendant’s conviction constitutes a
    manifest miscarriage of justice.”   United States v. Griffin, 
    324 F.3d 330
    , 356 (5th Cir. 2003)(citation omitted).   When viewed in
    the light most favorable to the jury’s verdict, the evidence
    produced at trial was sufficient to establish all of the required
    elements for Renteria’s conviction on the methamphetamine count.
    Renteria’s allegations that the district court imposed a
    one-day limit for his criminal trial and responded erroneously to
    one of the jury’s notes during its deliberations lack factual
    merit.   Furthermore, because the challenged audio tape was
    sufficiently authenticated and it was not misleading, Renteria
    has failed to show that the district court abused its discretion
    by admitting that audio tape.   See United States v. Lance, 
    875 F.2d 1177
    , 1181 (5th Cir. 1988); United States v. Branch, 
    91 F.3d 699
    , 727-28 (5th Cir. 1996).
    No. 02-50509
    -3-
    Accordingly, the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.
    

Document Info

Docket Number: 02-50509

Citation Numbers: 96 F. App'x 949

Judges: Barksdale, Dennis, Emilio, Garza, Per Curiam

Filed Date: 4/23/2004

Precedential Status: Non-Precedential

Modified Date: 8/1/2023