United States v. Charles Lee Burroughs

72 F.3d 136 NOTICE: Ninth Circuit Rule 36-3 provides that dispositions other than opinions or orders designated for publication are not precedential and should not be cited except when relevant under the doctrines of law of the case, res judicata, or collateral estoppel.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. Charles Lee BURROUGHS, Defendant-Appellant. No. 94-30212. United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. Argued and Submitted Nov. 13, 1995. Decided Dec. 6, 1995. Before: WRIGHT, FERNANDEZ, and KLEINFELD, Circuit Judges. 1 MEMORANDUM * 2 Burroughs argues that the trial court erred in denying his motion for judgment of acquittal, because there was insufficient evidence to convict him of conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine. He concedes that there was a conspiracy, but argues that the evidence was insufficient to connect him with it, and that what evidence there was, was unworthy of belief. 3 We review to determine "whether 'any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.' " United States v. Roston, 986 F.2d 1287, 1989 (9th Cir.1993). We must view all evidence in a light most favorable to the government,…