Filed: May 09, 2000
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 99-50883 _ DOMINGO MARTINEZ, Petitioner-Appellant, versus GARY L. JOHNSON, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION, Respondent-Appellee. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas (D.C. No. A-96-CV-695) _ May 4, 2000 Before REAVLEY, DAVIS and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Our question is whether under the evidence, considered in the light most favorable
Summary: IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT _ No. 99-50883 _ DOMINGO MARTINEZ, Petitioner-Appellant, versus GARY L. JOHNSON, DIRECTOR, TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION, Respondent-Appellee. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas (D.C. No. A-96-CV-695) _ May 4, 2000 Before REAVLEY, DAVIS and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Our question is whether under the evidence, considered in the light most favorable ..
More
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
_____________________
No. 99-50883
_____________________
DOMINGO MARTINEZ,
Petitioner-Appellant,
versus
GARY L. JOHNSON, DIRECTOR,
TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF CRIMINAL
JUSTICE, INSTITUTIONAL DIVISION,
Respondent-Appellee.
_______________________________________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court for
the Western District of Texas
(D.C. No. A-96-CV-695)
_______________________________________________________
May 4, 2000
Before REAVLEY, DAVIS and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Our question is whether under the evidence, considered in the light most favorable
to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found beyond a reasonable doubt
that Domingo Valdez Martinez possessed at least 400 grams in aggregate weight of
methamphetamine, including adulterants and dilutants. See Jackson v. Virginia,
443 U.S.
307 (1979).
*
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 R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be
published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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 complaint is that the testimony indicates that no more than 260.5 grams of the
methamphetamine was pure and that the additives should not be counted. The answer to
that complaint is that the state produced expert testimony that appellant had more than
400 grams of methamphetamine in final and useable form. The Texas court upheld the
verdict as supported by the evidence. No federal law is implicated and habeas corpus
must be denied.
AFFIRMED.
2