Case Name: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Juan LAURIANO-ESTEBAN, also known as Juanito Esteban Juan, Defendant-Appellant
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2016-10-18
Citations: 669 F. App'x 757
Docket Number: No. 16-40237 Conference Calendar
Parties: UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Juan LAURIANO-ESTEBAN, also known as Juanito Esteban Juan, Defendant-Appellant
Judges: Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 669
Pages: 757–758

Head Matter:
UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee v. Juan LAURIANO-ESTEBAN, also known as Juanito Esteban Juan, Defendant-Appellant
No. 16-40237 Conference Calendar
United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit.
Date Filed: 10/18/2016
Renata Ann Gowie, Assistant U.S. Attorney, U.S. Attorney’s Office, Houston, TX, for Plaintiff-Appellee.
Marjorie A. Meyers, Federal Public Defender, Timothy William Crooks, H. Michael Sokolow, Assistant Federal Public Defenders, Federal Public Defender’s Office, Houston, TX, for Defendant-Appellant.
Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
Appealing the judgment in a criminal case, Juan Lauriano-Esteban raises arguments that are foreclosed by United States v. Rodriguez, 711 F.3d 541, 562-63 & n.28 (5th Cir. 2013) (en banc), in which we held that the generic, contemporary definition of sexual abuse of a minor does not re quire the age of consent to be below 17 years old and does not include an age-differential requirement. He also raises an argument that is foreclosed by United States v. Elizondo-Hemandez, 755 F.3d 779, 781-82 (5th Cir. 2014), which held that the Texas offense of indecency with a child by contact satisfied the generic definition of sexual abuse of a minor. Accordingly, the motion for summary disposition is GRANTED, and the judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED.
Pursuant to 5th Cir. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5th Cir. R. 47.5.4.