UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
_____________________
No. 99-20181
Summary Calendar
_____________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
PEDRO MUNIVE,
Defendant-Appellant.
_________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
(H-94-CR-300-1)
_________________________________________________________________
January 3, 2000
Before SMITH, BARKSDALE, and PARKER, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Pedro Munive appeals his conviction for conspiracy to possess
with the intent to distribute and aiding and abetting the
possession with the intent to distribute in excess of five
kilograms of cocaine. His sole contention on appeal is that the
district court erred by denying his challenges for cause to three
prospective jurors who testified during voir dire that they would
tend to believe the testimony of government agents, forcing him to
waste peremptory challenges on those jurors.
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
To the extent that Munive contends that the denials of his
challenges for cause violated his Sixth Amendment right to an
impartial jury, the claim fails because he does not contend that
any of the jurors who actually served were not impartial. See Ross
v. Oklahoma, 487 U.S. 81, 88 (1988); United States v. Webster, 162
F.3d 308, 342 n.36 (5th Cir. 1998) (citation omitted), cert.
denied, ___ U.S. ___, 120 S. Ct. 83 (1999). Munive’s claim that he
was denied his statutory right to free exercise of his peremptory
challenges also fails because he has not demonstrated that the
district court abused its discretion in determining that the
challenged jurors were impartial. See United States v. Scott, 159
F.3d 916, 925 (5th Cir. 1998); United States v. Munoz, 15 F.3d 395,
397 (5th Cir.), cert. denied, 511 U.S. 1134 (1994).
AFFIRMED
2