Rosca

MEMORANDUM *

Vasile Valy Rosea appeals his conviction for conspiracy, in violation of 18 U.S.C. *606 § 371 . As the facts and the procedural posture of the case are known to both parties, we repeat them here only as necessary.

I

Rosea first argues on appeal that the evidence was insufficient to prove his connection to the single, overall conspiracy charged in the indictment. “We review sufficiency of evidence challenges to determine whether viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, any rational trier of fact could have found the essential elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.” United States v. Herrera-Gonzalez, 263 F.3d 1092, 1095 (9th Cir.2001) (internal quotation marks omitted). Where, as here, the “indictment alleges an overall conspiracy which the defendant joined after its inception, we are faced with two inquiries. The first is whether the overall conspiracy existed____ The second inquiry is whether the defendant was connected to the overall conspiracy.” United States v. Umagat, 998 F.2d 770 , 773 n. 3 (9th Cir.1993).

For purposes of this argument, Rosea concedes that the evidence proved a single, overall conspiracy. Furthermore, the…