United States v. Baguma , 112 F. App'x 322 ( 2004 )

United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FIFTH CIRCUIT October 5, 2004
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 03-10714
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
CHRIS ATWOOKI BAGUMA,
Defendant-Appellant.
Appeals from the United States District Court
for the Northern District of Texas
(3:03-CR-49-ALL-D)
Before JONES, BARKSDALE, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
A jury convicted Chris Atwooki Baguma for willfully and
falsely claiming United States citizenship, in violation of 18
U.S.C. § 911, and for willfully failing or refusing to apply for
documents necessary to depart from the United States, in violation
of 8 U.S.C. § 1253(a)(1)(B). Baguma claims the evidence was
insufficient to prove that he acted willfully in either instance.
The standard of review for an insufficient evidence claim is
“whether, viewing all the evidence in the light most favorable to
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
the verdict, a rational trier of fact could have found that the
evidence established the essential elements of the offense beyond
a reasonable doubt”. United States v. Villarreal, 324 F.3d 319,
322 (5th Cir. 2003). Such review does not include review of the
weight of the evidence or of the credibility of the witnesses.
United States v. Garcia, 995 F.2d 556, 561 (5th Cir. 1993).
Moreover, “it is not necessary that the evidence exclude every
reasonable hypothesis of innocence or be wholly inconsistent with
every conclusion except that of guilt”. United States v. Williams,
264 F.3d 561, 576 (5th Cir. 2001) (internal quotation and citation
omitted). Viewing the evidence in the requisite light most
favorable to the verdict, there is sufficient evidence for each
conviction. Villarreal, 324 F.3d at 322.
A conviction for impersonating a United States citizen
requires proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant
“falsely and willfully represent[ed] himself to be a citizen of the
United States”. 18 U.S.C. § 911. While he was appealing a
deportation order, Baguma began employment in Texas. At trial, he
testified that he accidently twice checked the box on his I-9 form
stating he was a United States citizen. He claimed he gave his
employer documentation verifying he was an alien with the right to
work in the United States and theorized the employer’s human
resource personnel should have corrected the error on the form.
Baguma’s testimony is in direct conflict with the testimony of the
2
employer’s representative, who stated that Baguma did not provide
documentation that he was an alien. “A jury is free to choose
among reasonable constructions of the evidence”, and “it retains
the sole authority to weigh any conflicting evidence and to
evaluate the credibility of the witnesses”. United States v. Loe,
262 F.3d 427, 432 (5th Cir. 2001) (internal quotation and citations
omitted), cert. denied, 534 U.S. 974 (2001). Presented with these
conflicting accounts, a reasonable jury could have rejected
Baguma’s testimony as not credible and found that he willfully
represented himself as a citizen on the two I-9 forms submitted to
his employer.
A conviction under 8 U.S.C. § 1253(a)(1)(B) requires proof
that the defendant was an alien subject to a final order of removal
who willfully failed or refused to make an application for travel
documents necessary for his departure. At trial, Baguma testified
that he did not know that he would be violating the law by refusing
to complete the application for travel documents to leave the
United States and denied that the Immigration and Naturalization
Service (INS) officers informed him that he could be prosecuted for
that refusal. This testimony directly conflicts with that of the
INS officers, who testified that they repeatedly informed Baguma
that his refusal to cooperate in the application process was a
criminal act that would be prosecuted. Given the testimony of the
INS officers, a reasonable jury could have rejected Baguma’s
3
testimony and found that he willfully refused to apply for
documents necessary to depart from the United States. Loe, 262
F.3d at 432.
AFFIRMED
4