United States v. Eliseo Domingues-Chalpeno

Good Law
544 F. App'x 676
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitOctober 29, 201319-35154California678 words

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…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.