United States v. Romeo Santos

962 F.2d 15 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel. UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. Romeo SANTOS, Defendant-Appellant. No. 91-10287. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted May 4, 1992. * Decided May 7, 1992. Before CYNTHIA HOLCOMB HALL, BRUNETTI and LEAVY, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Appellant Romeo Santos appeals his conspiracy conviction on the grounds that there was insufficient evidence that he participated in a conspiracy to distribute crystal methamphetamine. We affirm. 3 The elements of criminal conspiracy are "(1) an agreement to engage in criminal activity, (2) one or more overt acts taken to implement the agreement, and (3) the requisite intent to commit the substantive crime." United States v. Meyers, 847 F.2d 1408, 1412-13 (9th Cir.1988). "An implicit agreement may be inferred from the facts and circumstances of the case." United States v. Hernandez, 876 F.2d 774, 777 (9th Cir.) (quoting United States v. Monroe,…