USA v. Rafael Moreno-Ornellas, No. 16-40249 (5th Cir. 2016)

Annotate this Case

Download PDF

Case: 16-40249 Document: 00513722248 Page: 1 Date Filed: 10/18/2016 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT No. 16-40249 Conference Calendar United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit FILED October 18, 2016 UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff-Appellee Lyle W. Cayce Clerk v. RAFAEL MORENO-ORNELLAS, Defendant-Appellant Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Texas USDC No. 7:14-CR-1714-1 Before HIGGINBOTHAM, JONES, and HIGGINSON, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: * Appealing the judgment in a criminal case, Rafael Moreno-Ornellas 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 require 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 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 R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.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: 16-40249 Document: 00513722248 Page: 2 Date Filed: 10/18/2016 No. 16-40249 v. Elizondo-Hernandez, 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. Finally, he raises an argument that is foreclosed by United States v. Teran-Salas, 767 F.3d 453, 458-62 (5th Cir. 2014), in which we determined that the appellant was not entitled to relief based merely on the existence of a theoretical possibility that a defendant could be convicted under Texas Health & Safety Code § 481.112(a) for conduct that would not qualify as a federal drug trafficking offense. Accordingly, the motion for summary disposition is GRANTED, and 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.