Prieta-Quezada

MEMORANDUM *

Ramon Prieta-Quezada appeals his conviction and sentence for conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute at least five kilograms of cocaine in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 846 , 841(a)(1). He argues that there was insufficient evidence to support his conviction and that the district court erred in not granting him a downward adjustment at sentencing because of his minimal involvement in the underlying conspiracy compared to the other participants. We have jurisdiction pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm. The facts are known to the parties, and we repeat them here only as necessary.

We review insufficiency of evidence claims de novo. However, that review is “highly deferential,” United States v. Rubio-Villareal, 967 F.2d 294, 296 (9th Cir. 1992) (en banc), and we review the evidence “in the light most favorable to the prosecution, determining whether any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt,” United States v. Stewart, 420 F.3d 1007, 1015 (9th Cir.2005) (internal citation and quotation omitted).

“To establish a drug conspiracy, the government must prove: 1) an agreement to accomplish an…