United States v. Naranjo ( 2000 )

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
_______________
m 98-41145
Summary Calendar
_______________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
VERSUS
PEDRO NARANJO,
Defendant-Appellant.
_________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
_________________________
January 18, 2000
Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and reasonable doubt on all elements of the
PARKER, Circuit Judges. charged offenses. See United States v. Resio-
Trejo, 45 F.3d 907, 910-13 (5th Cir. 1995);
PER CURIAM:* United States v. Casilla, 20 F.3d 600, 602-07
(5th Cir. 1994); United States v. Garza, 990
Pedro Naranjo appeals his conviction of F.2d 171, 173-76 (5th Cir. 1993). The
conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute modified Allen charge did not place undue
a quantity exceeding 1,000 kilograms of pressure on the jury, and the court did not
marihuana and possession with intent to abuse its discretion in giving it. See United
distribute a quantity exceeding 1,000 States v. Winters, 105 F.3d 200, 203-04 (5th
kilograms of marihuana in violation of 18 Cir. 1997); United States v. Nguyen, 28 F.3d
U.S.C. § 2 and 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), 477, 484 (5th Cir. 1994). Because the record
841(b)(1)(a), and 846. He argues that the as to Naranjo’s claim of ineffective assistance
evidence is insufficient to support his of counsel is inadequately developed, we
conviction, that the court erred in giving a decline to consider it, but without prejudice to
modified Allen charge, and that he received his right to assert it in a collateral proceeding.
ineffective assistance of counsel. See United States v. Scott, 159 F.3d 916, 924-
25 (5th Cir. 1998); United States v. Bounds,
Viewed in the light most favorable to the 943 F.2d 541, 544 (5th Cir. 1991).
verdict, the evidence is sufficient to support a
rational juror’s finding of guilt beyond a AFFIRMED.
*
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determined that this opinion should not be published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.