United States v. Carreto ( 2023 )

Case: 22-40710 Document: 00516744906 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/10/2023
United States Court of Appeals
for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
____________ FILED
May 10, 2023
No. 22-40710
Summary Calendar Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
____________
United States of America,
Plaintiff—Appellee,
versus
Jose Antonio Carreto,
Defendant—Appellant.
______________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:19-CR-301-1
______________________________
Before Smith, Southwick, and Douglas, Circuit Judges.
Per Curiam:*
A jury convicted Jose Carreto of conspiracy to possess with intent to
distribute a mixture containing a detectable amount of heroin resulting in
serious bodily injury (counts one and three) and conspiracy to possess with
intent to distribute a mixture containing a detectable amount of methamphet-
amine (count two). Carreto moved for a new trial on counts one and three
based on newly discovered evidence, i.e., a sworn statement in which Kolton
_____________________
*
This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 22-40710 Document: 00516744906 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/10/2023
No. 22-40710
Watson recanted his trial testimony that he purchased heroin from Carreto
and later sold it to a young girl who ingested it and overdosed. The district
court denied the motion, and Carreto appeals.
Carreto has not shown that the court abused its discretion by denying
the motion for new trial. See United States v. Pratt, 807 F.3d 641, 645 (5th
Cir. 2015). As the court determined, Carreto failed to establish that Wat-
son’s broad, vague statement, which we view with extreme suspicion, would
have probably resulted in an acquittal. See United States v. Ardoin, 19 F.3d
177, 181 (5th Cir. 1994); see also United States v. Adi, 759 F.2d 404, 408 (5th
Cir. 1985). Carreto’s failure to establish this factor was fatal to his motion for
new trial. See United States v. Freeman, 77 F.3d 812, 817 (5th Cir. 1996); see
also United States v. Blackthorne, 378 F.3d 449, 452 (5th Cir. 2004).
AFFIRMED.
2