Filed: Jun. 18, 2013
Latest Update: Mar. 28, 2017
Summary: Case: 12-41295 Document: 00512277537 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/18/2013 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED June 18, 2013 No. 12-41295 Conference Calendar Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. JUAN ROBERTO CABALLERO-ESCAMILLA, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 1:12-CR-202-1 Before JONES, OWEN, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges. P
Summary: Case: 12-41295 Document: 00512277537 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/18/2013 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED June 18, 2013 No. 12-41295 Conference Calendar Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. JUAN ROBERTO CABALLERO-ESCAMILLA, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 1:12-CR-202-1 Before JONES, OWEN, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges. PE..
More
Case: 12-41295 Document: 00512277537 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/18/2013
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
June 18, 2013
No. 12-41295
Conference Calendar Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
JUAN ROBERTO CABALLERO-ESCAMILLA,
Defendant-Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 1:12-CR-202-1
Before JONES, OWEN, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Appealing the judgment in a criminal case, Juan Roberto Caballero-
Escamilla raises an argument that he concedes is foreclosed by United States v.
Betancourt,
586 F.3d 303, 308-09 (5th Cir. 2009), which held that knowledge of
drug type and quantity is not an element of the offense under 21 U.S.C. § 841.
The appellant’s motion for summary disposition is GRANTED, and the judgment
of the district court is AFFIRMED.
*
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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.