Filed: May 09, 2005
Latest Update: Feb. 21, 2020
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT May 9, 2005 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 04-50469 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff - Appellee v. SRINATH AUDITYAN Defendant - Appellant - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 1:03-CR-211-ALL-LY - Before KING, Chief Judge, and DeMOSS and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Srinath Audityan has appealed his j
Summary: United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit F I L E D IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT May 9, 2005 Charles R. Fulbruge III Clerk No. 04-50469 Summary Calendar UNITED STATES OF AMERICA Plaintiff - Appellee v. SRINATH AUDITYAN Defendant - Appellant - Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 1:03-CR-211-ALL-LY - Before KING, Chief Judge, and DeMOSS and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM:* Srinath Audityan has appealed his ju..
More
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT May 9, 2005
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 04-50469
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA
Plaintiff - Appellee
v.
SRINATH AUDITYAN
Defendant - Appellant
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. 1:03-CR-211-ALL-LY
--------------------
Before KING, Chief Judge, and DeMOSS and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Srinath Audityan has appealed his jury conviction of
attempted enticement of a child to engage in illicit sexual
activity. Audityan contends that the district court erred in
refusing to give a spoliation instruction. Because there is no
reason to believe that the Government acted in bad faith in
failing to record the telephone conversations at issue, the
district court did not abuse its discretion in refusing to give
the instruction. See United States v. Wise,
221 F.3d 140, 156
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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. 04-50469
-2-
(5th Cir. 2000); see also United States v. Townsend,
31 F.3d 262,
270 (5th Cir. 1994) (standard of review). The conviction is
AFFIRMED.