Hernandez

MEMORANDUM **

Defendant-appellant Ignacio Lopez Hernandez (“Hernandez”) appeals his conviction for conspiracy to distribute heroin, in violation of 21 U.S.C. § 846 . He contends that the district court made several erroneous evidentiary rulings and also erred in denying his Rule 29 motion for a judgment of acquittal. 1 We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm. The facts are known to the parties and we do not recite them here, except as necessary to explain our reasoning.

A. Coconspirator Statement

Hernandez argues that the district court violated Fed.R.Evid. 801(d)(2)(E) and the Confrontation Clause when it admitted testimony that Hernandez’s coconspirator, Guadelupe Reyes (“Reyes”), identified Hernandez as the owner of the heroin.

1. Rule 801(d)(2)(E)

“[A] statement by a coconspirator of a party during the course and in the furtherance of the conspiracy” is admissible under the coconspirator exception to the hearsay rule. Fed.R.Evid. 801(d)(2)(E). In order for a coconspirator’s out-of-court statements to be admissible, however, the defendant’s “knowledge of and participation in an alleged conspiracy with the putative coconspirator ... must be…