IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 01-41091
Conference Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
PABLO ALFONSO FUENTES-CAMPOS,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. B-01-CR-217-1
--------------------
June 18, 2002
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, DAVIS, and EMILIO M. GARZA, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Pablo Alfonso Fuentes-Campos appeals his conviction following
a guilty plea to illegal reentry. He argues that the factual
basis was insufficient to support his guilty plea because it did
not establish that he was “present in the United States” and that
he was “found in Cameron County, Texas,” as charged in the
indictment.
*
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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
No. 01-41091
-2-
Federal Rule of Criminal Procedure 11(f) requires the
district court to ensure that there is a factual basis for the
plea by comparing “(1) the conduct to which the defendant admits
with (2) the elements of the offense charged in the indictment or
information” to ensure that the defendant understands not only
the nature of the charge but also that his conduct falls within
the charge. United States v. Marek, 238 F.3d 310, 315 (5th Cir.)
(en banc) (citation omitted), cert. denied, 122 S. Ct. 37 (2001).
We review Fuentes’s challenge for plain error only. See United
States v. Vonn, 122 S. Ct. 1043, 1046 (2002) (applying plain-
error review to unobjected-to Rule 11 violations).
Fuentes did not voluntarily approach customs officials at a
port of entry, cf. United States v. Angeles-Mascote, 206 F.3d 529
(5th Cir. 2000), and, moreover, the factual recitation indicates
that the portion of the bridge on which the train was traveling
when he was found by U.S. Customs agents was located in Cameron
County, Texas. Fuentes has therefore not established plain
error, and his conviction is AFFIRMED.
United States v. Fuentes-Campos
Combined Opinion