Angulo

Joel and Octavio Angulo, Fidel Vargas and Jaime Limdn were convicted following a second jury trial 1 for conspiracy to distribute cocaine and/or heroin and for possession with intent to distribute cocaine and/or heroin in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 841 (a)(1) and 846. We now remand to the district court for an evidentiary hearing relating to the defendants’ motion for mistrial based upon claims of jury tampering. We find no merit to the other claims raised on appeal.

Limón asserts several evidentiary errors. These arguments are without merit. 2 We also find no merit in Limon’s argument that the district court abused its discretion in denying his motions to sever and for a new trial and erred in denying his Rule 29 motion for acquittal based on insufficiency of the evidence. 3 We reject as well the argument by defendants Joel and Octavio Angulo that the district court erred in denying them downward adjustments based upon acceptance of responsibility.

*846 We turn now to the question of jury tampering.. During the course of the trial, a juror, Ms. Zodolske, received a telephone call at her home in which the caller said, “I know where you live.” The next day, Ms. Zodolske asked…