United States v. Castaneda-Martinez

108 F. App'x 209
CourtCourt of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
DecidedSeptember 20, 2004
Docket03-51103, 03-51104
StatusUnpublished
Cited by1 cases

This text of 108 F. App'x 209 (United States v. Castaneda-Martinez) 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. Castaneda-Martinez, 108 F. App'x 209 (5th Cir. 2004).

Opinion

PER CURIAM: *

In these consolidated appeals, Ruben Castaneda-Martinez (“Castaneda”) challenges his jury — trial conviction and 63-month sentence for illegal re-entry, 8 U.S.C. § 1326, and the revocation of his supervised release. We AFFIRM.

Castaneda argues that the district court erred in refusing to instruct the jury on the insanity defense. He contends that his illegal re-entry conviction should be vacated and that the revocation of his supervised release must also be vacated.

The difficulty with this contention is that there is no evidence of a severe mental illness resulting in an inability to appreciate the nature and quality or the wrongfulness of his acts. Dr. Briones did testify to a mental illness due to substance abuse joined with an impulsivity and, further, that it was possible for Castaneda to feel that it would be worse to disobey God’s will than man’s law. And Castaneda did testify that he thought that there was no spiritual wrong for him to enter the United States.

We determine that this evidence fails to meet the requirement “that a rational jury could conclude, by clear and convincing evidence, that he was unable to appreciate his wrong doing as a result of a severe mental illness.” See United States v. Dixon, 185 F.3d 393, 406 (5th Cir.1999).

*210 Castaneda also raises an Apprendi contention that is foreclosed by AlmendarezTorres.

We AFFIRM Castaneda’s conviction and sentence, and we AFFIRM the revocation of his supervised release.

*

Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the Court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.

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

Related

Castaneda-Martinez v. United States
543 U.S. 1131 (Supreme Court, 2005)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
108 F. App'x 209, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/united-states-v-castaneda-martinez-ca5-2004.