Pena

United States v. Pena

Good Law
234 F. App'x 766
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitJuly 12, 2007No. 06-30619California636 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

MEMORANDUM **

Daniel Remigio-Salcedo Pena appeals his jury trial conviction and sentence for conspiracy to distribute at least 500 grams of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of methamphetamine; distribution of at least 500 grams of a mixture or substance containing a detectable amount of methamphetamine; and possession with intent to distribute at least 50 grams of pure methamphetamine, in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841 (a)(1) and 846. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 , and we affirm.

Pena argues that the district court erred in denying his motion for acquittal. See Fed.R.Crim.P. 29. We review the denial of a Rule 29 motion de novo. United States v. Munoz, 233 F.3d 1117, 1129 (9th Cir.2000). “There is sufficient evidence to support a conviction if, viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the prosecution, a rational jury could have found the elements of the crime beyond a reasonable doubt.” Id. (citing Jackson v. Virginia, 443 U.S. 307, 319 , 99 S.Ct. 2781 , 61 L.Ed.2d 560 (1979)).

With respect to the conspiracy count, there was ample evidence presented that Pena 1) agreed to sell methamphetamine, 2) took overt steps in furtherance of…

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.