Chavez

MEMORANDUM ***

Once the government presents evidence of a conspiracy, “only a slight connection between the defendant and the conspiracy is necessary to convict the defendant of knowing participation in the conspiracy.” United States v. Hubbard, 96 F.3d 1223, 1226 (9th Cir.1996). The government introduced ample evidence that there was a conspiracy to distribute illegal drugs. In addition to Chavez’s knowledge, presence and conduct in the car during the interrupted drug deal, a subsequent search of the apartment shared by Chavez and a co-conspirator revealed substantial drug dealing paraphernalia including wrappers, scales, repackaging materials, coolers that had been used to carry drugs, and a piece of glass where the heroin had been cut on a table in the apartment which contained Chavez’s fingerprint. A rational juror could have found the requisite connection to support Chavez’s conviction for conspiracy. See United States v. Power, 881 F.2d 733, 737 (9th Cir.1989).

A rational juror could have also concluded that Chavez’s conduct during the drug deal, the drug paraphernalia found in her apartment, and her fingerprint on a tool used for cutting the drugs were sufficient to…