United States v. Jorge Rocha

Case: 17-40270 Document: 00514209518 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/25/2017

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit

No. 17-40270 FILED
Summary Calendar October 25, 2017
Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

JORGE ROCHA,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 5:16-CR-132-1

Before JONES, OWEN, and HAYNES, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *
Following a jury trial, Jorge Rocha was convicted of and sentenced for
assaulting a federal officer by contact and infliction of bodily injury, in violation
of 18 U.S.C. § 111(a)(1) and (b), and possession with intent to distribute 50
grams and more of methamphetamine and 500 grams and more of a mixture
and substance containing a detectable amount of methamphetamine, in
violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(A) and 18 U.S.C. § 2. Rocha appeals

* 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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.
 Case: 17-40270 Document: 00514209518 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/25/2017

No. 17-40270

his methamphetamine possession conviction on two related grounds. He
asserts that the Government failed to meet its obligation to prove that he had
knowledge of the type and quantity of controlled substance involved in his
offense. In the alternative, Rocha asserts that the jury instructions were
deficient because they did not require that the jury find that he knew the type
and quantity of controlled substance that he possessed.
As Rocha concedes, his arguments are foreclosed by United States v.
Betancourt, 586 F.3d 303, 308-09 (5th Cir. 2009), which held that Flores-
Figueroa v. United States, 556 U.S. 646 (2009), did not overturn United States
v. Gamez-Gonzalez, 319 F.3d 695 (5th Cir. 2003), and that the Government is
not required to prove knowledge of drug type and quantity as an element of a
§ 841 drug offense.
Accordingly, Rocha’s motion for summary disposition is GRANTED, and
the judgment is AFFIRMED.

2