United States v. Eliseo Domingues-Chalpeno
Opinion
Opinion
MEMORANDUM
Defendant Elíseo Domingues-Chalpeno (“Domingues”) appeals his jury conviction and 151-month sentence for possession of and conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute methamphetamine. He claims 1) the district court erred in admitting the government investigator’s testimony concerning out-of-court statements by a hotel clerk; 2) there was insufficient evidence to support his conviction; 3) his trial counsel made an inappropriate statement before the jury; 4) he was entitled to a four-level downward sentencing adjustment as a minimal participant; and 5) his sentence was unreasonable. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.
Assuming, without deciding, that Agent Smith’s testimony regarding the hotel clerk’s out-of-court statements was hearsay, its admission was harmless error. Even excluding this testimony, there was more than enough evidence introduced at trial to allow a rational juror to find all the elements of the possession and conspiracy-charges beyond a reasonable doubt. See United States v. Alvarez, 358 F.3d 1194, 1214 (9th Cir.2004). This evidence showed that, among other things, Domingues was closely associated with his…