Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca5-14-40530/USCOURTS-ca5-14-40530-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Alexander Ortega
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 14-40530

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

ALEXANDER ORTEGA,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 1:12-CR-68-1

Before PRADO, OWEN, and GRAVES, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Alexander Ortega appeals from his conviction of conspiracy to possess 

more than 50 grams of methamphetamine, possession with intent to distribute 

5.1 kilograms of methamphetamine, conspiracy to import more than 50 grams 

of methamphetamine, and importation of 5.1 kilograms of methamphetamine. 

He argues that the district court committed reversible error by admitting the 

record of his prior border crossings into evidence.

* 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.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

FILED

May 8, 2015

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 

Case: 14-40530 Document: 00513036464 Page: 1 Date Filed: 05/08/2015
No. 14-40530

“This court applies a highly deferential standard in reviewing a district 

court’s evidentiary rulings, reversing only for abuse of discretion. Even then, 

the error is not reversible unless the defendant was prejudiced.” United States 

v. Booker, 334 F.3d 406, 411 (5th Cir. 2003). This court looks first at whether 

the extrinsic offense evidence is relevant to an issue other than the defendant’s 

character and next looks at whether the evidence possesses probative value 

that is not substantially outweighed by its undue prejudice. See United States 

v. Beechum, 582 F.2d 898, 911 (5th Cir. 1978) (en banc). The evidence must 

also satisfy the requirements of Federal Rule of Evidence 403. Id.

The evidence of Ortega’s prior border crossings was offered for an 

admissible purpose, namely, to show his knowledge of and familiarity with the 

Brownsville border crossing. Moreover, Agent Jupe specifically admitted that 

the information was not evidence of any crime or proof that Ortega was 

involved in drug trafficking. The evidence was probative of Ortega’s knowing

participation in the conspiracy because it would have made it easier for him to 

direct other, less knowledgeable individuals through the area. Given the 

testimony provided by Ortega’s coconspirators, it is unlikely that evidence of 

Ortega’s purportedly innocent border crossings had any prejudicial impact on 

the jury. As such, the district court did not abuse its discretion by admitting 

this evidence. Booker, 334 F.3d at 411. Accordingly, the judgment is

AFFIRMED.

2

Case: 14-40530 Document: 00513036464 Page: 2 Date Filed: 05/08/2015