### IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 16

- 11770 Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appellee

v. JUAN PASILLAS , Defendant

- Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Northern District of Texas USDC No. 4:16

- CR

- 122

- 20

Before WIENER, DENNIS, and SOUTHWICK, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * A jury convicted Juan Pasillas of conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute 500 grams or more of methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 and 21 U.S.C. § 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A). The court sentenced Pasillas to 360 months of imprisonment and f ive years of supervised release, an d Pasillas filed a timely notice of appeal.

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED February 22, 2018 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 16-11770 Document: 00514358196 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/22/2018No. 16

- 11770

2 Pasillas argues that (1) the evidence was insufficient to convict him of conspiracy to possess methamphetamine with intent to distribute, (2) this court should reverse and remand for a new trial because signif i cant and substantial portions of the record are missing , and (3 ) the district court erred by imposing a two

- level enhancement for possession of imported methamphetamine. T his court reviews a challenge to sufficiency of the evidence de novo

. United States v. Chon , 713 F.3d 812, 818 (5th Cir. 2013)

. This review is “hi ghly deferential to the verdict.” Id. (citations omitted ). “[V]iewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution,” we consider whether “any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.” Id. (citations omitted). To prove a criminal conspiracy, the Government has the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that (1) an agreement to violate the law existed and ( 2) each conspirator knew of, intended to join, and voluntarily participated in the conspiracy. Id. ; see United States v. Maseratti , 1 F.3d 330, 336 , 337 (5th Cir. 1993)

. Though a mere buyer

- seller relationship does not alone demonstrate that one is a co

- conspirator, evidence of buying and selling activity is probative of whether a defendant intended to join the conspiracy by redistributing the illegal substance

. See Masaratti , 1 F.3d at 336

. Here, presented with e vidence of the quantit y and frequency of Pasillas methamphetamine purchase s and expert testimony that Pasillas’s wire

- tapped phone calls with his supplier demonstrated his intention to distribute this methamphetamine to other customers, a rational trier of fact could have determined that Pasillas knew of, intended to join, and voluntarily participated in an agreement to possess and distribute methamphetamine. See id

. Case: 16-11770 Document: 00514358196 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/22/2018No. 16

- 11770

3 Second, Pasillas argues that this court should reverse and remand for a new trial because the court reporter’s record is incomplete. Under the Court Reporter Act (CRA), a court reporter “shall . . . record[ ] verbatim . . . all proceedings in cr iminal cases had in open court.” 28 U.S.C. § 753(b)

. When “a criminal defendant is represented on appeal by counsel other than the attorney at trial, the absence of a substantial and significant portion of the record . . . is sufficient to mandate reversal.” United States v. Selva , 559 F.2d 1303, 1306 ( 5th Cir. 1977). Here, however, the omitted material is not substantial or significant, but rather “administrative in nature.” United States v. Gieger , 190 F.3d 661, 667 (5th Cir. 1999)

. Therefore, a reversal is not warranted because the record is “merely technically incomplet e. ” Selva, 559 F.2d at 1306 n.5

. Third, Pasillas argues that an enhancement under U.S.S.G. § 2D1.1(b)(5) is not warranted without the offender’s knowledge that the distributed methamphetamine was imported

. However, he acknowledges that this issue is fore closed by United States v. Foulks , 747 F.3d 914 (5th Cir. 2014)

. Therefore, the district court did not err by applying the enhancement. See id. at 915. Pasillas’s conviction and sentence are AFFIRMED. Case: 16-11770 Document: 00514358196 Page: 3 Date Filed: 02/22/2018