United States Court of Appeals
Fifth Circuit
F I L E D
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT April 23, 2007
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
No. 06-41118
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JOSE LUIS PEREZ,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Eastern District of Texas
USDC No. 4:05-CR-164-2
--------------------
Before JOLLY, DENNIS, and CLEMENT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Jose Luis Perez appeals his jury-trial conviction for
conspiracy to harbor and transport illegal aliens for financial
gain and harboring and transporting illegal aliens for financial
gain. Perez argues that the district court abused its discretion
and violated his Confrontation Clause rights by sustaining an
objection to a question he asked a government witness on cross-
examination.
Because Perez was allowed to cross-examine the government
witness and was not prevented from raising issues of the witness’s
*
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this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except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. 06-41118
-2-
credibility or reliability, the district court did not violate
Perez’s Confrontation Clause rights. See United States v. Restivo,
8 F.3d 274, 278 (5th Cir. 1993). As the question to which the
district court sustained the objection sought to elicit a lay
opinion not based upon personal perception, the testimony Perez
sought to elicit was inadmissible under FED. R. EVID. 701. See Tex.
A&M Research Found. v. Magna Transp., Inc., 338 F.3d 394, 403 (5th
Cir. 2003). Accordingly, the district court did not abuse its
discretion by sustaining the objection. See United States v.
Dixon, 413 F.3d 520, 525 (5th Cir. 2006) (no abuse of discretion to
exclude inadmissible testimony).
AFFIRMED.