United States v. Israel Perez-Solis
709 F.3d 453
| 5th Cir. | 2013Background
- Martinez and Perez-Solis were charged with conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute 50+ grams of methamphetamine and with possession with intent to distribute 50+ grams.
- The May 2011 drug transaction involved Martinez delivering methamphetamine samples and coordinating a transfer in the parking lot near The Golden Corral, Laredo, TX.
- Lopez secretly recorded Perez’s statements; the ice chest in Perez’s van concealed the methamphetamine, which was visible when the lining was removed.
- DEA agents arrested Perez and Martinez after the exchange; Perez testified he acted under Alaniz’s direction and denied prior drug involvement.
- The defense challenged evidence on sufficiency, cross-examination scope, variance from indictment, prosecutorial conduct, and Guideline applications at sentencing.
- Perez did not move for acquittal; the court convicted on both counts and sentenced Perez to 292 months concurrent with supervised release and fines.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Sufficiency of evidence for conspiracy | Perez knew of the agreement | Lack of knowledge of agreement | Evidence supported knowledge and agreement |
| Sufficiency of evidence for possession | Perez knowingly possessed and intended to distribute | Insufficient knowledge of drug possession | Evidence supported knowledge and intent to distribute |
| Cross-examination scope | Financial data relevant to credibility | Cross exceeded scope and prejudiced defense | Permissible scope; not reversible error |
| Material variance from indictment | Indictment aligned with charged conspiracy and possession | Government theory broadened by closing | No prejudicial plain error; no constructive amendment |
| Prosecutorial misconduct | Closing arguments supported by record | Inflammatory or improper appeals | No plain error affecting substantial rights |
| Sentencing enhancements—obstruction and minor-participant | Enhancements supported by Perez’s trial testimony | Lack of willful perjury; no minor-participant reduction | Obstruction enhancement upheld; no minor-participant reduction |
Key Cases Cited
- Olano v. United States, 507 U.S. 725 (U.S. 1993) (plain-error review for forfeited claims; perjury standard)
- Delgado, 672 F.3d 320 (5th Cir.) (en banc; evidentiary and procedural rules in trial)
- Robles-Pantoja, 887 F.2d 1250 (5th Cir.) (conspiracy evidence and inference from presence/association)
- McCullough, 631 F.3d 783 (5th Cir.) (evidentiary review and prejudice assessment)