Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca8-06-02437/USCOURTS-ca8-06-02437-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Juan Rodriguez
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

1

The Honorable Lawrence L. Piersol, United States District Judge for the

District of South Dakota.

United States Court of Appeals

for the Eighth Circuit

___________

No. 06-2437

___________

United States of America, *

*

Plaintiff - Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the District

* of South Dakota.

Juan Rodriguez, *

* [UNPUBLISHED]

Defendant - Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: October 17, 2006

 Filed: December 5, 2006 

___________

Before MELLOY, BEAM, and BENTON, Circuit Judges.

___________

PER CURIAM.

Following a jury trial, Defendant Juan Rodriguez was convicted of conspiring

to distribute in excess of five kilograms of a mixture or substance containing cocaine

in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846. The district court1

 sentenced him to

135 months’ imprisonment. His conviction was supported by the testimony of

numerous coconspirators. He now argues that his coconspirators were not credible

and that their testimony is insufficient to support the conviction. This argument is

without merit, and we will not disturb the jury’s credibility assessments on appeal.

Appellate Case: 06-2437 Page: 1 Date Filed: 12/05/2006 Entry ID: 2115192
-2-

United States v. Hernandez, 301 F.3d 886, 889 (8th Cir. 2002) (“The court should not

assess the credibility of the witnesses or weigh the evidence.”).

 

Regarding sentencing, Rodriguez challenges the district court’s drug quantity

determination as being clearly erroneous. This argument, too, is without merit. The

jury found beyond a reasonable doubt that the conspiracy involved over five

kilograms of cocaine. The jury’s finding was supported by substantial evidence,

including coconspirator testimony that placed the drug quantity at an amount

substantially greater than five kilograms. At sentencing, the district court was

required to determine a drug quantity under the preponderance of the evidence

standard, and the district court adopted the five kilogram quantity found by the jury.

“It is axiomatic that a fact proved beyond a reasonable doubt cannot simultaneously

be disproved by a preponderance of the evidence.” United States v. Campos, 362 F.3d

1013, 1016 (8th Cir. 2004). 

We affirm the judgment of the district court.

______________________________

Appellate Case: 06-2437 Page: 2 Date Filed: 12/05/2006 Entry ID: 2115192