Filed: Feb. 04, 2002
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 01-50573 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus ALVARO GONZALO ISAIS, Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas (SA-00-CR-483-1) _ February 1, 2002 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, WIENER, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Alvaro Gonzalo Isais contests his convictions for making false statements to Deputy United States Marshals by falsely misleading th
Summary: UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 01-50573 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee, versus ALVARO GONZALO ISAIS, Defendant-Appellant. _ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas (SA-00-CR-483-1) _ February 1, 2002 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, WIENER, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Alvaro Gonzalo Isais contests his convictions for making false statements to Deputy United States Marshals by falsely misleading the..
More
UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-50573
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
ALVARO GONZALO ISAIS,
Defendant-Appellant.
_________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
(SA-00-CR-483-1)
_________________________________________________________________
February 1, 2002
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, WIENER, and BARKSDALE, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Alvaro Gonzalo Isais contests his convictions for making false
statements to Deputy United States Marshals by falsely misleading
them about the whereabouts of a federal fugitive and for harboring
and concealing that fugitive, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 1001 and
1071. Isais asserts: his convictions should be overturned because
the Government, on three occasions, improperly asked Isais on
cross-examination whether certain Government witnesses were lying,
based on the conflict between Isais’ testimony and that of those
witnesses; the questions were improper under FED. R. EVID. 602
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
(witness must have personal knowledge of the subject matter of the
testimony) and 701 (opinion testimony by non-expert witness must be
rationally based on witness’s perception, helpful to a clear
understanding of the testimony or to the determination of a fact
issue, and not based on scientific or other specialized knowledge);
and such questioning amounted to prosecutorial misconduct.
We review only under the plain-error standard. See United
States v. Calverley,
37 F.3d 160, 162-64 (5th Cir. 1994) (en banc),
cert. denied,
513 U.S. 1196 (1995). Isais has the burden of
demonstrating such error. See United States v. Olano,
507 U.S.
725, 734 (1993).
Isais does not identify any controlling authority which
applies the two evidentiary rules at issue to the situation where
the cross-examination of the defendant concerns whether another
witness’ testimony was fabricated. Under the plain-error standard,
Isais fails to meet his burden of demonstrating any error, plain or
otherwise, under Rule 602 or Rule 701. See United States v.
Navarro,
169 F.3d 228, 232-33 (5th Cir.), cert. denied,
528 U.S.
845 (1999).
In asserting prosecutorial misconduct, Isais relies upon
authority from other circuits. Given the lack of controlling
authority, any error was neither clear nor obvious. See United
States v. Jobe,
101 F.3d 1046, 1062 (5th Cir. 1996), cert. denied,
522 U.S. 823 (1997).
AFFIRMED
2