Castro-Melgoza

MEMORANDUM *

The district court did not err in giving the Jewell 1 instruction. The testimony of Agent Stentz tended to show either actual knowledge or deliberate ignorance, depending on whether the jury believed all or only part of his testimony. 2 Even if the jurors did not believe the agent’s testimo *656 ny that Castro-Melgoza confessed to actual knowledge of the drugs, they could have believed the agent’s testimony that Castro-Melgoza told the agent that (1) he borrowed the truck from someone in Mexico he knew was a drug dealer, (2) he was instructed to drop off the truck at a specific place in California; and (8) he was to be paid $1,000 for the successful delivery of the truck. This evidence presented sufficient suspicious circumstances to create a middle ground between actual knowledge and no knowledge, such that the jury could infer “that the defendant deliberately shut [his] eyes to avoid confirming the existence of a fact [he] all but knew.” 3 Also, the defendant’s opening statement suggested a focus on scienter, making scienter likely to arise in closing argument and deliberations.

The government’s statements in rebuttal argument that