United States v. Juan Jimenez

MEMORANDUM

Juan Pablo Jimenez challenges the sufficiency of the evidence to support his conviction by a jury for conspiracy to distribute marijuana in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 (a)(1) and 846. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution and resolving any potential conflicts in favor of the jury’s verdict, see Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319 , 99 S.Ct. 2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979); United States v. Alvarez-Valenzuela, 231 F.3d 1198, 1201-02 (9th Cir.2000), we hold sufficient evidence supports the jury’s verdict. A defendant’s connection to a conspiracy may be inferred from circumstantial evidence, and coordination between co-conspirators is strong circumstantial proof. See United States v. Reed, 575 F.3d 900, 924 (9th Cir.2009); United States v. Herrera-Gonzalez, 263 F.3d 1092, 1095 (9th Cir.2001).

Jimenez argues that he was merely present, and only the testimony of his co-conspirator Reyes tends to prove he knowingly participated in the conspiracy. But a rational juror could have found otherwise. The timeline of the various agents’ discoveries of vehicles along the southern…