United States v. Martin Vasquez-Garcia , 739 F.3d 249 ( 2014 )

Case: 12-41158 Document: 00512494670 Page: 1 Date Filed: 01/09/2014
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 12-41158
Summary Calendar
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
FILED
January 9, 2014
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
MARTIN VASQUEZ-GARCIA,
Defendant-Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 2:12-CR-202-1
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DENNIS, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
Martin Vasquez-Garcia appeals his two convictions for transporting an
unlawful alien. He argues that the evidence adduced at trial was not sufficient
to support his convictions.
Because Vasquez-Garcia did not preserve his sufficiency challenges, we
review for plain error only. See United States v. Delgado, 672 F.3d 328-31 (5th
Cir.) (en banc), cert. denied, 133 S. Ct. 525 (2012). To show plain error,
* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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.
Case: 12-41158 Document: 00512494670 Page: 2 Date Filed: 01/09/2014
No. 12-41158
Vasquez-Garcia must establish that “the record is devoid of evidence pointing
to guilt or [that] the evidence is so tenuous that a conviction is shocking.” Id. at
331 (emphasis in original) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). To
convict Vasquez-Garcia under 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(1)(A)(ii), the Government had
to prove beyond a reasonable doubt that:
(1) an alien entered or remained in the United States in violation
of the law, (2) [Vasquez-Garcia] transported the alien within the
United States with intent to further the alien’s unlawful presence,
and (3) [Vasquez-Garcia] knew or recklessly disregarded the fact
that the alien was in the country in violation of the law.
United States v. Nolasco-Rosas, 286 F.3d 762, 765 (5th Cir. 2002) (footnote
citation omitted).
While Vasquez-Garcia argues that his own attestations of innocence
were more credible than the testimony of Government witnesses that
established his guilty knowledge and intent, we will not second-guess the jury’s
credibility determinations. See Ramirez v. Dretke, 398 F.3d 691, 695 (5th Cir.
2005). Considering the evidence adduced at trial, Vasquez-Garcia fails to show
that the record is devoid of evidence of his guilt. See Delgado, 672 F.3d at 331.
AFFIRMED.
2