Moreno

United States v. Moreno

Good Law
93 F. App'x 131
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitMarch 12, 2004No. 02-30286; D.C. No. CR-93-00127-AK-HRHCalifornia463 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM *

Jamie Ernest Moreno appeals his conviction and sentence on one count of conspiracy to distribute cocaine. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and affirm.

I

We review the denial of Moreno’s motion for acquittal for plain error because it was not renewed at the close of all the evidence. United States v. Alvarez-Valenzuela, 231 F.3d 1198, 1200-01 (9th Cir.2000). There was none, as Moreno knew that the cocaine which he sold would be broken down and distributed for resale. Cf. United States v. Lennick, 18 F.3d 814, 818-20 (9th Cir.1994) (involving growth and gift of marijuana for personal use). It is not necessary that he knew the cocaine was destined for Alaska. See, e.g., United States v. Herrera-Gonzalez, 263 F.3d 1092, 1095 (9th Cir.2001) (observing that a defendant need not have known all the conspirators, participated in the conspiracy from the beginning, been part of all its enterprises, or known all its details). From all the evidence, a rational trier of fact could find beyond a reasonable doubt that Moreno had at least a slight connection to the Echavarria/Alaska conspiracy. See United States v. Skillman, 922 F.2d 1370, 1373 (9th Cir.1990) (noting…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.