USA v. Timmy Perrin
UNPUBLISHED OPINION FILED. [16-51060 Affirmed] Judge: CES, Judge: EBC, Judge: LHS. Mandate pull date is 07/13/2017 for Appellant Timmy Dee Perrin [16-51060]
Date Filed: 06/22/2017
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
United States Court of Appeals
June 22, 2017
Lyle W. Cayce
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
TIMMY DEE PERRIN,
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. 7:16-CR-26-1
Before STEWART, Chief Judge, and CLEMENT and SOUTHWICK, Circuit
PER CURIAM: *
Timmy Dee Perrin was convicted of conspiracy to possess with intent to
distribute 50 grams or more of actual methamphetamine, possession with
intent to distribute 50 grams or more of actual methamphetamine, and
possession of firearms in furtherance of the aforementioned drug trafficking
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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not
be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH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.
Date Filed: 06/22/2017
crimes. He was sentenced to a total of 180 months of imprisonment and five
years of supervised release.
Perrin argues that the evidence was insufficient to sustain his
convictions because no rational trier of fact could have credited the testimonies
of his codefendants. Their testimonies were not incredible as a matter of law.
See United States v. Osum, 943 F.2d 1394, 1405 (5th Cir. 1991). Accordingly,
this claim of error is unavailing. See United States v. Zamora, 661 F.3d 200,
209 (5th Cir. 2011).
Next, Perrin argues that the district court erred in admitting under
Federal Rule of Evidence 404(b) evidence of his prior arrest. This evidence was
not admissible under Rule 404(b) because the Government presented no
evidence that Perrin committed the prior bad act.
See United States v.
Gonzalez-Lira, 936 F.2d 184, 189-90 (5th Cir. 1991). We need not decide
whether the district court plainly erred in admitting this evidence because any
error did not affect Perrin’s substantial rights. There is not a reasonable
probability of a different outcome in this case given the codefendants’
inculpatory testimonies against Perrin and other circumstantial evidence of
Perrin’s guilt. See United States v. Cervantes, 706 F.3d 603, 616 (5th Cir.
The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?