Alberto Moreno appeals his convictions following a jury trial of conspiring to possess with intent to distribute 1000 kilograms or more of marijuana and conspiring to commit money laundering.

Moreno fails to show that his right to an impartial jury drawn from a fair cross-section of the community was violated; he cites only the composition of the randomly chosen venire at his own trial and does not attempt to show a systematic exclusion of minorities from other venires over time in the Western District of Texas’s jury selection process. See Duren v. Missouri, 439 U.S. 357, 364, 99 S.Ct. 664, 58 L.Ed.2d 579 (1979); United States v. Williams, 264 F.3d 561, 568 (5th Cir. 2001). Likewise, while he claims that the district court abused its discretion by limiting his Confrontation Clause rights to cross-examine Government witnesses, he fails to cite any evidence showing that he was clearly prejudiced by the limitations of which he complains. See United States v. Landerman, 109 F.3d 1053, 1061 (5th Cir. 1997). Finally, Moreno does not identify with specificity any instance in which the district court refused to admit into evidence the criminal *277 conviction of any Government witness. See Fed.R.Evid. 609.

AFFIRMED.