United States v. Marmino

* 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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
F I L E D
December 9, 2003
Charles R. Fulbruge III
Clerk
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 03-50125
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
JASON RAY MARMINO,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Texas
USDC No. W-02-CR-79-4
--------------------
Before BARKSDALE, EMILIO M. GARZA, and DENNIS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Jason Ray Marmino appeals his conviction by a jury of
conspiracy to manufacture methamphetamine in violation of
21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846. He argues that there was
insufficient evidence to convict him and that the district court
abused its discretion in admitting evidence of his prior wrongful
acts under FED. R. EVID. 404(b) because such evidence related only

-- 1 of 2 --

No. 03-50125
-2-
to his character and that its prejudicial effect substantially
outweighed its probative value under FED. R. EVID. 403.
Marmino has not shown that the testimony regarding his prior
involvement with activities related to the manufacture of
methamphetamine was not probative on the issue of his intent to
join the conspiracy or that the admission of this testimony was
improperly prejudicial under Rule 403. See United States v.
Beechum, 582 F.2d 898, 911 (5th Cir. 1978) (en banc). Therefore,
the district court did not abuse its discretion in admitting the
evidence of Marmino’s prior wrongful acts. See United States v.
Roberts, 619 F.2d 379, 383-84 (5th Cir. 1980)
The jury reasonably could infer from the evidence of
Marmino’s presence in the motel room, his actions during the
weekend in question, his prior drug-related activities, and his
prior associations with some of the co-conspirators that he
knowingly and intentionally participated in the conspiracy to
manufacture methamphetamine. See United States v. Broussard, 80
F.3d 1030-32 (5th Cir. 1996). Thus, viewing the evidence and all
inferences drawn from the evidence in the light most favorable to
the verdict, the jury could find beyond a reasonable doubt that
Marmino committed the charged offense. See id.
Accordingly, Marmino’s conviction is AFFIRMED.

-- 2 of 2 --