Graciano-Cabanilla
United States v. Graciano-Cabanilla
Opinion
Lead Opinion
MEMORANDUM *
Jose Ramon Graciano-Cabanilla appeals his conviction for (1) conspiracy to possess *762 with intent to distribute marijuana and to distribute marijuana and (2) possession with intent to distribute marijuana. He contends that the pay/owe ledger, which was seized from an alleged co-conspirator, was hearsay and that the district court erred in admitting it. The government cross-appeals the district court’s sentence arguing that the court erred by failing to impose the obstruction of justice sentencing enhancement under § 3C1.1 of the United States Sentencing Guidelines (U.S.S.G.). We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 and 18 U.S.C. § 3742 (b) and affirm the conviction and the sentence.
I.
Graciano-Cabanilla contends that the pay/owe drug ledger was inadmissible hearsay under Rule 802 of the Federal Rules of Evidence. We disagree.
“A statement is not hearsay if ... [t]he statement is offered against a party and is ... a statement by a coconspirator of a party during the course and in furtherance of the conspiracy.” Fed.R.Evid. 801(d)(2)(E). In order to admit a co-conspirator statement for the truth of its contents, the court must find that the preliminary…