United States v. Christopher Arvizu

5 F.3d 540 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Christopher ARVIZU, Defendant-Appellant. No. 93-50026. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Submitted Aug. 11, 1993. * Decided Aug. 25, 1993. Before: PREGERSON, BRUNETTI, and RYMER, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM ** 2 Christopher Arvizu appeals his convictions, following a jury trial, for possession and importation of marijuana with intent to distribute in violation of 21 U.S.C. Secs. 841 (a)(1), 952(a). Arvizu argues the evidence was insufficient to support his convictions. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. Sec. 1291 and affirm. 3 "In determining whether the evidence was sufficient to support ... [Arvizu's] convictions, we must determine whether, after viewing all the evidence in the light most favorable to the government, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime(s) beyond a reasonable doubt." See United States v.…