USA v. Jorge Bedolla-Talavera, No. 14-50486 (5th Cir. 2015)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 14-50486 Document: 00512940792 Page: 1 Date Filed: 02/19/2015 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 14-50486 Summary Calendar United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED February 19, 2015 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee v. JORGE BEDOLLA-TALAVERA, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Texas USDC No. 3:13-CR-1695 Before SMITH, WIENER, and ELROD, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Jorge Bedolla-Talavera appeals his conviction for illegal reentry into the United States, which resulted in a below-guidelines sentence of 40 months in prison and a three-year term of supervised release. He argues that his rights under the Confrontation Clause were infringed by the admission of a Certificate of Nonexistence of Record (CNR) at trial and that the remaining evidence is insufficient to support his conviction. The Government argues that 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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. * Case: 14-50486 Document: 00512940792 Page: 2 Date Filed: 02/19/2015 No. 14-50486 there is no Confrontation Clause violation because Bedolla-Talavera had an opportunity to challenge the admission of the CNR pursuant to Federal Rule of Evidence 803(10)(B) and that the evidence adduced at trial is sufficient to uphold the conviction even absent the CNR. Under the Sixth Amendment, a criminal defendant has the right “to be confronted with the witnesses against him.” Coy v. Iowa, 487 U.S. 1012, 1015 (1988). When, as is the case here, a Confrontation Clause claim was preserved in the district court, it is reviewed de novo but is nonetheless subject to harmless error review. United States v. Acosta, 475 F.3d 677, 680 (5th Cir. 2007). We decline to resolve the Confrontation Clause issue because our review of the evidence adduced at trial convinces us that any error resulting from admission of the CNR was harmless. Trial evidence showed that BedollaTalavera was found lying on the ground, facedown, in the United States near the Rio Grande, and that his pants were wet below the knees. He admitted that he had no documentation, and he told the processing agent he was a Mexican citizen. His Mexican birth certificate and a prior removal order were admitted. This evidence sufficed to permit the jury to conclude that BedollaTalavera did not have permission to apply for admission to this country. Accordingly, admission of the CNR was harmless. See United States v. Martinez-Rios, 595 F.3d 581, 587 & n.7 (5th Cir. 2010). This evidence also suffices to permit a reasonable jury to find beyond a doubt that BedollaTalavera was guilty of illegal reentry. See United States v. Girod, 646 F.3d 304, 313 (5th Cir. 2011); 8 U.S.C. § 1326. The judgment of the district court is AFFIRMED. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
