United States v. Zeny Mabasa Ordonez

MEMORANDUM

Zeny Mabasa Ordonez appeals her conviction for (1) conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute fifty grams or more of methamphetamine in violation of 21 U.S.C. § § 846 and 841(a)(1); and (2) possession with intent to distribute fifty grams or more of methamphetamine in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 (a)(1) and 841(b)(1)(A) and 18 U.S.C. § 2 . We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Ordonez argues that the district court abused its discretion and violated Federal Rules of Evidence 401 and 403 by admitting expert testimony that drug traffickers do not use unknowing couriers. However, “expert testimony on drug trafficking organizations and the behavior of unknowing couriers is admissible when relevant, probative of a defendant’s knowledge, and not unfairly prejudicial under the standard set forth in the Federal Rules of Evidence.” United States v. Sepulveda-Barraza, 645 F.3d 1066, 1072 (9th Cir.2011). Here, the district court did not abuse its discretion by admitting the expert testimony, because its determination was not “illogical, implausible, or without support in inferences that may be drawn from the facts in the…