USA v. Yair Parroquin-Luna

Filing

UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [16-41355 Affirmed ] Judge: EGJ , Judge: LHS , Judge: SAH Mandate pull date is 05/04/2017 for Appellant Yair Parroquin-Luna; granting motion for summary affirmance filed by Appellant Mr. Yair Parroquin-Luna [8393350-2] [16-41355]

Case: 16-41355

Document: 00513951675

Page: 1

Date Filed: 04/13/2017

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 16-41355
Summary Calendar

United States Court of Appeals
Fif h Circuit

FILED
April 13, 2017
Lyle W. Cayce
Clerk

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee
v.
YAIR PARROQUIN-LUNA,
Defendant-Appellant
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Southern District of Texas
USDC No. 2:16-CR-122-1
Before JOLLY, SOUTHWICK, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: *

Yair Parroquin-Luna pled guilty without a written plea agreement to
possession with intent to distribute 920.9 grams of methamphetamine, in
violation of 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1) and (b)(1)(A). The district court sentenced
him to 80 months in prison and five years of supervised release. On appeal, he
argues that the factual basis for his guilty plea was inadequate because 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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.
*

Case: 16-41355

Document: 00513951675

Page: 2

Date Filed: 04/13/2017

No. 16-41355
Government did not prove that he knew the type and quantity of the drugs
involved in the offense.
As Parroquin-Luna concedes, his argument is foreclosed by United States
v. Betancourt, 586 F.3d 303, 308–09 (5th Cir. 2009).

It 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 the drug type and quantity as an element
of a Section 841 offense. See United States v. Gil-Cruz, 808 F.3d 274, 278 (5th
Cir. 2015) (relying on Betancourt to reject as foreclosed a similar challenge to
a drug conspiracy conviction).
Accordingly, Parroquin-Luna’s motion for summary disposition is
GRANTED, and the district court’s judgment is AFFIRMED.

2