United States v. Escajeda, 8 F.4th 423

Midland, Texas informant made two controlled buys of cocaine from Michael Escajeda after being equipped and monitored by police.
Officers searched Escajeda’s home (with consent) and seized over 100 grams of cocaine, a Glock, ammunition, and over $6,000 in cash.
Escajeda was Mirandized and admitted selling 4–5 ounces of cocaine per week since his release about a year earlier and having no lawful job for six to seven years.
He pled guilty to conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute, two counts of possession with intent to distribute, and being a felon in possession of a firearm; received 162 months’ imprisonment.
At sentencing the court orally imposed five years’ supervised release on the conspiracy count and three years on each other count to run concurrently; the written judgment mistakenly listed five years on each count.
On appeal Escajeda argued the factual basis was insufficient to support the conspiracy charge and that the written judgment conflicted with the oral sentence; the Fifth Circuit affirmed the plea and remanded to correct the written judgment.

Issue	Plaintiff's Argument	Defendant's Argument	Held
Whether the factual basis supported the drug-conspiracy conviction	The record (controlled buys, large drug quantity, cash, gun, admissions) suffices to infer a tacit conspiracy	Two controlled buys to a government informant cannot prove an agreement; buyer-seller or informant-exception precludes conspiracy	Affirmed: circumstantial evidence (quantities, cash, gun, admissions) supports an inference of conspiracy; no plain error
Whether the written judgment’s supervised-release terms conflict with the oral sentence and require correction	Government concedes the written terms conflict and that the error is a scrivener’s mistake that should be fixed	Escajeda argues the inconsistency should be corrected to match the oral sentence	Remanded for limited purpose: district court to amend written judgment under Rule 36 to conform to oral pronouncement

United States v. Nepal, 894 F.3d 204 (5th Cir. 2018) (plain-error review and examining the whole record for factual-basis sufficiency)
United States v. Delgado, 672 F.3d 320 (5th Cir. 2012) (buyer–seller/informant exceptions and limits on inferring conspiracy)
United States v. Akins, 746 F.3d 590 (5th Cir. 2014) (tacit conspiracies may be inferred from circumstantial evidence)
United States v. Crooks, 83 F.3d 103 (5th Cir. 1996) (presence, association, cash, and drugs as circumstantial proof of conspiracy)
United States v. Suarez, 879 F.3d 626 (5th Cir. 2018) (elements of drug-conspiracy and relevance of guns/quantity)
United States v. Booker, 334 F.3d 406 (5th Cir. 2003) (a conspirator need not know all details; participation in larger objectives suffices)
Rogers v. United States, 340 U.S. 367 (1951) (identity of other conspirators not required)
Greer v. United States, 141 S. Ct. 2090 (2021) (standard for plain-error relief)
United States v. Devine, 934 F.2d 1325 (5th Cir. 1991) (scrivener’s errors may be corrected)
United States v. Spencer, 513 F.3d 490 (5th Cir. 2008) (Rule 36 normally used to correct written judgment clerical errors)