United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
June 24, 2005
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
_____________________ Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 04-50839
_____________________
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff - Appellee,
versus
CURTIS DARRYL NORRIS,
Defendant - Appellant.
__________________________________________________________________
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas, Austin
USDC No. 1:98-CR-281-2
_________________________________________________________________
Before JOLLY, HIGGINBOTHAM, and JONES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
The district court judge did not commit reversible error by
referring the jury to the original jury instruction on conspirator
liability without consulting trial counsel, because that
instruction was a correct and clear statement of the law and was
applicable to the facts and evidence presented at trial. See
United States v. Bieganowski, 313 F.3d 264, 293 (5th Cir. 2002).
Next, the record contains ample circumstantial evidence from which
the jury could infer that Norris knowingly and voluntarily entered
into a criminal conspiracy with his father to manufacture and
distribute methamphetamine. See United States v. Cardenas, 9 F.3d
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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.
1139, 1157 (5th Cir. 1993) (holding that a jury may infer an
agreement from circumstantial evidence). Finally, because Norris
cannot demonstrate that any error committed by the district court
at his sentencing affected his substantial rights, Norris’s claims
of Fifth and Sixth Amendment violations at his sentencing must be
rejected under plain error review. See United States v. Mares, 402
F.3d 511, 520 (5th Cir. 2005). Accordingly, Norris’s convictions
and sentence are
AFFIRMED.
2