United States v. Campos-Espinosa

CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedJune 12, 2026
Docket25-40591
StatusUnpublished

This text of United States v. Campos-Espinosa (United States v. Campos-Espinosa) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
United States v. Campos-Espinosa, (5th Cir. 2026).

Opinion

Case: 25-40591 Document: 50-1 Page: 1 Date Filed: 06/12/2026

United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit

____________ FILED June 12, 2026 No. 25-40591 Lyle W. Cayce Summary Calendar Clerk ____________

United States of America,

Plaintiff—Appellee,

versus

Moises Campos-Espinosa,

Defendant—Appellant. ______________________________

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 3:18-CR-22-41 ______________________________

Before Richman, Southwick, and Willett, Circuit Judges. Per Curiam: * Moises Campos-Espinosa was convicted of conspiracy to distribute heroin and cocaine and possession of cocaine with intent to distribute, and he appeals the 121-month total prison term imposed on remand. He challenges the denial of his request for safety valve relief and a mitigating role adjustment.

_____________________ * This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5. Case: 25-40591 Document: 50-1 Page: 2 Date Filed: 06/12/2026

No. 25-40591

The district court’s finding that Campos-Espinosa failed to provide a full and truthful disclosure warranting a safety valve adjustment is plausible in light of the record as a whole. See United States v. Treft, 447 F.3d 421, 426 (5th Cir. 2006). He contends that his testimony was a truthful disclosure, but it was contradicted both by other testimony and physical evidence at trial. Moreover, his assertion that he was truthful to the Government is undercut by the jury’s verdict of guilty. See United States v. Moreno-Gonzalez, 662 F.3d 369, 375 (5th Cir. 2011). Similarly, the finding that Campos-Espinosa was an average participant in the offense is plausible in light of the record as a whole. See United States v. Torres-Hernandez, 843 F.3d 203, 207 (5th Cir. 2016). While he categorizes himself as merely a courier, the record shows that he was involved in the formation of the distribution cell and worked with members of the group to purchase a tractor trailer for purposes of transporting cocaine, heroin, and money. He was not among the least culpable of the participants or less culpable than most other participants in the offense. See U.S.S.G. § 3B1.2 & comment. (nn.4-5); see also United States v. Castro, 843 F.3d 608, 612-13 (5th Cir. 2016). AFFIRMED.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. Jaime Moreno-Gonzalez
662 F.3d 369 (Fifth Circuit, 2011)
United States v. David Henry Treft
447 F.3d 421 (Fifth Circuit, 2006)
United States v. Obed Torres-Hernandez
843 F.3d 203 (Fifth Circuit, 2016)
United States v. Guadalupe Castro
843 F.3d 608 (Fifth Circuit, 2016)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
United States v. Campos-Espinosa, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-campos-espinosa-ca5-2026.