Court Opinion

ID: 9930068
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2024-02-06 01:00:46.72706+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T11:02:12.253728
License: Public Domain

Case: 23-30362         Document: 00517055820             Page: 1      Date Filed: 02/05/2024

              United States Court of Appeals
                   for the Fifth Circuit
                                      ____________                              United States Court of Appeals
                                                                                         Fifth Circuit

                                       No. 23-30362                                    FILED
                                     Summary Calendar                           February 5, 2024
                                     ____________                                 Lyle W. Cayce
                                                                                       Clerk
   United States of America,

                                                                       Plaintiff—Appellee,

                                             versus

   Paul Anthony Lewis,

                                               Defendant—Appellant.
                      ______________________________

                      Appeal from the United States District Court
                         for the Western District of Louisiana
                               USDC No. 3:22-CR-184-1
                      ______________________________

   Before Davis, Ho, and Ramirez, Circuit Judges.
   Per Curiam: *
          A jury convicted Paul Anthony Lewis of conspiracy to possess with
   intent to distribute various controlled substances and several counts of
   possession with intent to distribute controlled substances. The district court
   sentenced him to 240 months of imprisonment, to be followed by supervised
   release.

          _____________________
          *
              This opinion is not designated for publication. See 5th Cir. R. 47.5.
Case: 23-30362      Document: 00517055820          Page: 2    Date Filed: 02/05/2024

                                    No. 23-30362

          On appeal, Lewis argues that the Government called a witness to
   testify at trial for the sole purpose of impeaching her in order to introduce a
   recording of her interview with authorities, which would otherwise be
   inadmissible as hearsay. The evidence contained in the recording, according
   to Lewis, was the only thing linking him to a backpack containing narcotics.
          A district court’s evidentiary rulings are reviewed under the abuse of
   discretion standard. United States v. Cisneros-Gutierrez, 517 F.3d 751, 757
   (5th Cir. 2008). Any party may attack the credibility of a witness, “including
   the party calling the witness.”     Fed. R. Evid. 607.          However, the
   Government “may not call a witness it knows to be hostile for the primary
   purpose of eliciting otherwise inadmissible impeachment testimony.”
   Cisneros-Gutierrez, 517 F.3d at 760 (internal quotation marks and footnote
   citation omitted).
          Lewis fails to show that this was the Government’s primary purpose.
   See id. Lewis’s reliance on United States v. Hogan, 763 F.2d 697 (5th Cir.
   1985), opinion withdrawn in part on other grounds, 771 F.2d 82 (5th Cir. 1985),
   is unavailing. Here, the Government indicated that the witness’s testimony
   at trial might be different from her prior statement, the witness’s prior
   statements were not under oath, and the witness’s testimony was helpful to
   the Government in that she admitted that she told authorities that Lewis
   carried the backpack. Accordingly, Lewis has failed to show that the district
   court abused its discretion in allowing the Government to present witness’s
   testimony. See Cisneros-Gutierrez, 517 F.3d at 757, 760.
          AFFIRMED.

                                         2