United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT August 6, 2004
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 03-40566
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JOSE LUIS ESCAMILLA,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. B-93-CR-151-9
--------------------
Before DAVIS, BARKSDALE, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Jose Luis Escamilla appeals his convictions for conspiracy to
possess over 100 kilograms of marijuana with intent to distribute
and for possession of approximate 186.3 kilograms of marijuana with
intent to distribute. He asserts that the prosecutor asked a
series of rhetorical questions which tended to bolster the
credibility of the government witness and to indicate to the jury
that the fact Escamilla had been indicted constituted evidence of
his guilt. He contends that the prosecutor’s reference to the
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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. 03-40566
-2-
success of the confidential informants constituted improper
bolstering. Escamilla also maintains that the prosecutor attempted
to shift the burden of proof to the defense.
We have reviewed the record, the evidence, and the closing
arguments of the parties. Escamilla has not established that the
challenged statements constituted improper remarks that either
prejudiced his substantive rights or constituted plain error.
United States v. Munoz, 150 F.3d 401, 414-15 (5th Cir. 1998);
United States v. Washington, 44 F.3d 1271, 1278 (5th Cir. 1995).
Consequently, the conviction is AFFIRMED.