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 five years of supervised release, and Pasillas filed 

a timely notice of appeal. 

 

* 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

February 22, 2018

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

 Case: 16-11770 Document: 00514358196 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/22/2018
No. 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 significant 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. 

This 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 “highly 

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 evidence of the quantity and frequency of

Pasillas methamphetamine purchases 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: 02/22/2018
No. 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 criminal 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 incomplete.” 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 foreclosed 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