T hi s di s pos i t i on i s notappr opr i a t e f orpubl i c a t i on and i s notpr e c e de nt * e xc e pta s pr ovi de d by 9th C i r . R . 36- 3.

T he pa ne l una ni m ous l y c onc l ude s thi s c a s e i s s ui t abl e f orde c i s i on ** w ith o u t o r a l a r g u m e n t. See F ed. R . A pp . P . 34 (a )( 2). NOT F OR P UB L I CAT I ON UN I TE D STATE S C OU RT OF APPE ALS FOR T HE NI NTH CI RC UI T UN I T E D S T AT E S OF AME R I C A, P l ai nt i ff

- A pp el l ee , v. J E S US S AN C HE Z - C AR R AN Z A, D e f

e n d a n t - A p p e lla n t. N o. 11- 30211 D . C . N o. 4: 10- c r - 00131- B L W - 14 ME MOR AN DU M *

A pp ea l fr om the U ni t ed S t at es D i stri ctC ou rt

f orthe D i s tr i c tof

I da ho B . L y nn W i nm i l l , C hi e f D i s tr i c tJ udge , P r e s i di ng S ubm i tt e d O c t obe r11, 2012 ** P ort l a nd, O r e gon B efo re: S IL V E R M A N , C L IF T O N , an d N . R . S M IT H , C i rcu i tJu d g es.

Je sus S anchez- C arranza app ea l s hi s j ury c on vi ct i on and sent ence . S anchezC a rr a nz ac ha l l e nge s the j ury ve r di c t , a s s e rt i ng tha tthe e vi de nc e w a s nots uf f i c i e nt 

# FI LED OC T 15 2012 M OLLY C. DW Y ER, CLERK U . S. C O U R T OF APPE ALS2

t o s us t a i n ac onvi c t i on f orc ons pi r a c y t o di s tr i but e m e tha m phe t a m i ne be y ond a r e a s o n ab l e d o u b t . H e f

u rth e ro b j e c t s t o th e d i s tr i c tj u d g e ' s f a i l u r e t o g r a n th i m a m i ni m a l pa rt i c i pa ntdow nw a r d a dj us tm e ntunde rU . S . S . G . § 3B 1. 2. W e ha ve j ur i s di c t i on unde r28 U . S . C . § 1291, a nd w e a f f i rm the j ury c onvi c t i on a nd se nt ence . 1 . T h e d is tr ic t c o u rt d id n o t e rrin d e n y in g th e m o tio n f o rju d g m e n t o f

a c q u itta l, b e c au s e th e e v id e n c e w a s s u f f ic ie n t to s u s ta in th e c o n v ic tio n . T h e r e w a s a m p le ci rc um st ant i al and d i re ctevi dence s ho w i ng thatS anchez- C arranza m ade a n ag reem en tw i th a co -co n sp i rat o r t o d i stri b u t e m eth am p h et am i n e. S p eci fi cal l y, S a nc he z - C a rr a nz a ’ s c o- c ons pi r a t ort e s t i f i e d a ttr i a l , e s t abl i s hi ng tha t( 1) he c ont a c t e d S a nc he z - C a rr a nz at o ge tthe m e tha m phe t a m i ne t o s e l l t o D e t e c t i ve M a r l e y ; ( 2) he r e c e i ve d the m e tha m phe t a m i ne f r om S a nc he z - C a rr a nz a ; a nd ( 3) he ga ve S a nc he z - C a rr a nz as om e of the m one y a f

t e rthe pur c ha s e , t o pa y f orthe m e th a m p h e ta m in e . T h is s a m e te s tim o n y a ls o p r o v id e s s u f f ic ie n t e v id e n c e th a t a ju ry c o u ld c o n c lu d e S a n c h e z - C a rr a n z ak n o w in g ly a n d in te n tio n a lly p a rtic ip a te d in th e c o n s p ir a c y . See U

ni ted Stat es v. H

erre ra-G on zalez , 2 6 3 F .3 d 1 0 9 2 , 1 0 9 7 ( 9 th C i r . 2001) ( “ T he e vi de nc e of [ de f e nda nt ’ s ] pa rt i c i pa t i on i n the a c t i vi t i e s of the conspi ra cyw i th k no w l edge of i t s c ri m i nal ac t i vi ty and an i nt ent i on t o further that ac t i vi ty t akes thi s c as e outof the ‘ m er e pre se nce’ l i ne of autho ri ty. ”) . P roof of an3

o v e rt a c t is n o t r e q u ir e d to e s tab lis h ac o n s p ir a c y u n d e r2 1 U .S .C . § 8 4 6 . U ni ted Stat es v. Su arez , 68 2 F . 3d 12 14 , 12 19 (9th C i r. 20 12 ). 2. T he di s tr i c tc ourtdi d notc l e a r l y e rri n de ny i ng the m i ni m a l pa rt i c i pa nt do w nw ar d adj ustm ent . T o the contrary , the re cord cl earl y i nd i ca t ed thatS anchezC a rr a nz as uppl i e d the m e tha m phe t a m i ne . S a nc he z - C a rr a nz adi d notof f e ra ny e v id e n c e s h o w in g th a t h e w a s s u b s ta n tia lly le s s c u lp ab le th a n h is c o - p a rtic ip a n t in th e o f f e n s e s . AF F I RME D.