Filed: Apr. 11, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 99-40643 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus ROBERT BRISENO, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. B-98-CR-634-1 - April 5, 2000 Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Robert Briseno appeals from his conviction for mail fraud and resultant 18-month sentence. He argues that the evidence was insufficie
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 99-40643 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus ROBERT BRISENO, Defendant-Appellant. - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. B-98-CR-634-1 - April 5, 2000 Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and PARKER, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Robert Briseno appeals from his conviction for mail fraud and resultant 18-month sentence. He argues that the evidence was insufficien..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-40643
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
ROBERT BRISENO,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. B-98-CR-634-1
--------------------
April 5, 2000
Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Robert Briseno appeals from his conviction for mail fraud
and resultant 18-month sentence. He argues that the evidence was
insufficient to support his conviction and that the district
court erred in its calculation of the amount of the loss
attributable to him. We have reviewed the record and find no
reversible error. The evidence is sufficient to prove that
Briseno made material misrepresentations in an accident report 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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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. 99-40643
-2-
which a reasonable man would attach importance in determining
whether to pay a fraudulent claim, thus satisfying the requisite
element of materiality. See United States v. Richards, ___ F.3d
___ (5th Cir. Feb. 9, 2000, No. 98-20441),
2000 WL 146318 at *8-
*10. Based upon the information contained in the PSR, Briseno
has also failed to show that the district court clearly erred in
its calculation of the amount of the intended loss attributable
to him. Accordingly, the judgment of the district court is
AFFIRMED.