Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-ca4-16-04360/USCOURTS-ca4-16-04360-0/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
Eric Noe Araujo Flores
Appellant
United States of America
Appellee

Document Text:

UNPUBLISHED

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT

No. 16-4360

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff - Appellee,

v.

ERIC NOE ARAUJO FLORES, a/k/a Eric Orellano Arujo, a/k/a 

Eric Orellana Arujo,

Defendant - Appellant.

Appeal from the United States District Court for the Eastern 

District of Virginia, at Alexandria. Liam O’Grady, District 

Judge. (1:15-cr-00320-LO-1)

Submitted: February 15, 2017 Decided: February 22, 2017

Before AGEE, DIAZ, and HARRIS, Circuit Judges.

Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion.

Joseph R. Conte, LAW OFFICE OF J. R. CONTE, Washington, D.C.;

Charles J. Soschin, LAW OFFICE OF C. J. SOSCHIN, Washington, 

D.C., for Appellant. Dana J. Boente, United States Attorney, 

Michael J. Frank, Assistant United States Attorney, Alexandria, 

Virginia, for Appellee.

Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.

Appeal: 16-4360 Doc: 41 Filed: 02/22/2017 Pg: 1 of 3
2

PER CURIAM:

Eric Noe Araujo Flores was convicted by a jury of four 

counts of sex trafficking of a child, in violation of 18 U.S.C. 

§ 1591(a) (2012) (sex trafficking convictions); three counts of 

foreign travel with intent to engage in illicit sexual conduct, 

in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 2423(b) (2012) (foreign travel 

convictions); one count of coercion and enticement, in violation 

of 18 U.S.C. § 2422(b) (2012) (coercion and enticement 

convictions); and one count of harboring an alien for an immoral 

purpose, in violation of 8 U.S.C. § 1328 (2012), and he was 

sentenced to 300 months in prison. Flores asserts that the 

Government presented insufficient evidence to support his sex 

trafficking, foreign travel, and coercion and enticement 

convictions. Finding no error, we affirm.

We review de novo a district court’s denial of a Fed. R. 

Crim. P. 29 motion for judgment of acquittal. United States v. 

Reed, 780 F.3d 260, 269 (4th Cir.), cert. denied sub nom. Cannon 

v. United States, 136 S. Ct. 112 (2015). A defendant 

challenging the sufficiency of the evidence faces “a heavy 

burden[.]” United States v. McLean, 715 F.3d 129, 137 (4th Cir. 

2013) (internal quotation marks omitted). The jury verdict must 

be sustained if “there is substantial evidence in the record, 

when viewed in the light most favorable to the government, to 

support the conviction.” United States v. Jaensch, 665 F.3d 83, 

Appeal: 16-4360 Doc: 41 Filed: 02/22/2017 Pg: 2 of 3
3

93 (4th Cir. 2011) (internal quotation marks omitted). 

“Substantial evidence is evidence that a reasonable finder of 

fact could accept as adequate and sufficient to support a 

conclusion of a defendant’s guilt beyond a reasonable doubt.” 

Id. (internal quotation marks and brackets omitted). In fact, 

“[r]eversal for insufficient evidence is reserved for the rare 

case where the prosecution’s failure is clear.” United States 

v. Ashley, 606 F.3d 135, 138 (4th Cir. 2010) (internal quotation 

marks omitted). We have reviewed the record and conclude that,

viewed in the light most favorable to the Government, there was 

substantial evidence to support Flores’ convictions.

Based on the foregoing, we affirm the district court’s 

judgment. We dispense with oral argument because the facts and 

legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials 

before this court and argument would not aid the decisional 

process.

AFFIRMED

Appeal: 16-4360 Doc: 41 Filed: 02/22/2017 Pg: 3 of 3