Filed: Dec. 24, 1997
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 97-50105 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus FELIPE MAYNEZ-ESPARZA, Defendant-Appellant. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. EP-96-CR-483 - - - - - - - - - - November 24, 1997 Before DUHE’, DeMOSS and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Felipe Maynez-Esparza (“Maynez”) appeals his conviction for possession with intent to distri
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 97-50105 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus FELIPE MAYNEZ-ESPARZA, Defendant-Appellant. - - - - - - - - - - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. EP-96-CR-483 - - - - - - - - - - November 24, 1997 Before DUHE’, DeMOSS and DENNIS, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Felipe Maynez-Esparza (“Maynez”) appeals his conviction for possession with intent to distrib..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 97-50105
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
FELIPE MAYNEZ-ESPARZA,
Defendant-Appellant.
- - - - - - - - - -
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. EP-96-CR-483
- - - - - - - - - -
November 24, 1997
Before DUHE’, DeMOSS and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Felipe Maynez-Esparza (“Maynez”) appeals his conviction for
possession with intent to distribute marijuana and importation of
marijuana in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 952(a) and
960(a)(1).
Maynez argues that the evidence presented at trial was
insufficient to support the jury’s finding that he knowingly
possessed and imported marijuana. We have reviewed the briefs
and the record, and conclude that the record is sufficient 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
No. 97-50105
-2-
support the jury’s finding that Maynez knowingly imported and
possessed marijuana with intent to distribute. See United States
v. Diaz-Carreon,
915 F.2d 951, 953 (5th Cir. 1990)
Maynez also argues that the district court erred in giving
the jury a deliberate ignorance instruction. Based on Maynez’s
defense of a lack of guilty knowledge and the evidence adduced at
trial, the district court did not err in its instruction. See
United States v. McKinney,
53 F.3d 664, 676 (5th Cir. 1995).
AFFIRMED.