United States v. Carl Ernest Whittenburg

15 F.3d 1095 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Carl Ernest WHITTENBURG, Defendant-Appellant. No. 92-10535. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Nov. 2, 1993. Decided Dec. 22, 1993. 1 Before: KOZINSKI and O'SCANNLAIN, Circuit Judges, and KELLEHER, * District Judge. 2 MEMORANDUM ** 3 Appellant Carl Whittenburg appeals his conviction and sentence for various drug-related offenses, including the operation of a continuing criminal enterprise under 21 U.S.C. Sec. 848 . 4 A. Whittenburg claims that insufficient evidence existed on which a jury could convict him under 21 U.S.C. Sec. 848 . Sufficient evidence exists to support a conviction if, "after viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt." Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319 (1979). 5 In order to prove…