United States v. Arceneaux

* 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that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent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.
IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS
FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT
No. 99-30700
Summary Calendar
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff-Appellee,
versus
TRAMELL REYMOND ARCENEAUX,
also known as Pramell Arceneaux,
also known as T,
Defendant-Appellant.
--------------------
Appeal from the United States District Court
for the Western District of Louisiana
USDC No. 98-CR-60009-1
--------------------
September 8, 2000
Before DAVIS, JONES and DeMOSS, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM:*
Tramell Reymond Arceneaux was convicted by a jury of
conspiracy to distribute crack and powder cocaine and
distribution of crack and powder cocaine in violation of 18
U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) & 846. He challenges the district court's
denial of his motion for a mistrial stemming from a Government
witness's reference to his "rap sheet" during the trial. He
challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to find him guilty on
the conspiracy and distribution charges. He also challenges the

-- 1 of 3 --

No. 99-30700
-2-
district court's application of a two-level increase to his base
offense level pursuant to U.S.S.G. § 3B1.1(c) for his leadership
role in the offense.
The district court did not abuse its discretion in denying
the motion for mistrial. The court allowed the Government to
elicit testimony that made clear to the jury that the information
referred to as a "rap sheet" was not necessarily criminal in
nature. Further, the court instructed the jury immediately
following the testimony and prior to deliberations that it was to
disregard any negative inference associated with the term and to
give the term no weight in its deliberations. The rehabilitative
testimony and the court's instructions, which the jurors are
presumed to have followed, effectively cured any taint created by
the reference to a "rap sheet". See United States v. Paul, 142
F.3d 836, 844 (5th Cir. 1998).
A reasonable jury could have inferred from the evidence that
Arceneaux agreed with others to distribute crack and powder
cocaine, that he knew of the conspiracy and intended to join it,
and that he participated in the conspiracy, and was thus guilty
beyond a reasonable doubt of conspiracy to distribute crack and
powder cocaine. See United States v. Puig-Infante, 19 F.3d 929,
936 (5th Cir. 1994); United States v. Ortega Reyna, 148 F.3d 540,
543 (5th Cir. 1998). A reasonable jury also could have inferred
from the evidence that Arceneaux knowingly distributed crack and
powder cocaine. See United States v. Gordon, 876 F.2d 1121, 1125
(5th Cir. 1989; Ortega Reyna, 148 F.3d at 543-44.

-- 2 of 3 --

No. 99-30700
-3-
The district court's finding that Arceneaux played a
leadership role in the conspiracy is plausible in light of the
record as a whole, and thus its application of the two-level
increase pursuant to § 3B1.1(c) is not clearly erroneous. See
United States v. Lowder, 148 F.3d 548, 553 (5th Cir. 1998).
AFFIRMED.

-- 3 of 3 --