IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS

FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

No. 12-41093

Summary Calendar

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,

Plaintiff-Appellee

v.

ALAN ADOLFO RIOS-MORALES,

Defendant-Appellant

Appeal from the United States District Court

for the Southern District of Texas

USDC No. 2:12-CR-312-1

Before REAVLEY, JONES, and PRADO, Circuit Judges.

PER CURIAM:*

Alan Adolfo Rios-Morales appeals his jury conviction of one count of

conspiracy to possess with intent to distribute more than five kilograms of

cocaine and one count of possessing with intent to distribute more than five

kilograms of cocaine, in violation of 18 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1), (b)(1)(A), 846. RiosMorales argues that the evidence was insufficient to support his conviction of

both counts. For the following reasons, we affirm.

United States Court of Appeals

Fifth Circuit

F I L E D

September 13, 2013

Lyle W. Cayce

Clerk

* Pursuant to 5TH CIR. R. 47.5, the court has determined that this opinion should not

be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5TH CIR.

R. 47.5.4.

 Case: 12-41093 Document: 00512373108 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/13/2013
No. 12-41093

When reviewing a preserved sufficiency claim, we decide “whether,

viewing all the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, a rational trier

of fact could have found that the evidence established the essential elements of

the offense beyond a reasonable doubt.” United States v. Villarreal, 324 F.3d

319, 322 (5th Cir. 2003) “All reasonable inferences must be drawn, and all

credibility determinations made, in the light most favorable to the verdict.” Id. 

To establish a conspiracy under § 846, the Government must prove that:

(1) an agreement existed between two or more persons to violate federal

narcotics law; (2) the defendant knew of the existence of the agreement; and

(3) the defendant voluntarily participated in the conspiracy. United States v.

Thomas, 690 F.3d 358, 366 (5th Cir. 2012). Rios-Morales argues that the

evidence was insufficient to prove his knowing and voluntary participation in a

conspiracy.

A search of the car Rios-Morales was driving revealed more than 15

kilograms of cocaine worth in excess of $1 million, which supports an inference

of knowledge. See Villareal, 324 F.3d at 324; see also United States v. Ochoa,

667 F.3d 643, 648 (5th Cir. 2012) (noting that knowledge of a conspiracy may be

inferred from the amount of drugs). In addition, Rios-Morales gave inconsistent

statements to officers regarding his activities and his ownership of the vehicle.

He told officers at the Pharr point of entry that he planned on traveling to

McAllen, just 10 miles from the border, to shop. However, after leaving Pharr,

he traveled to the Falfurrias checkpoint–some fifty miles north of the

border–where he claimed to be going to San Marcos to shop. He also

alternatively claimed to agents that he purchased the Mercedes; that it was a

company car; and that another person made arrangements to purchase the

vehicle. However, the car registration was in Rios-Morales’s name. These

inconsistent statements are further evidence of guilty knowledge. See United

States v. Casilla, 20 F.3d 600, 606 (5th Cir. 1994). In light of the foregoing, the

evidence supports the verdict on the conspiracy count.

2

 Case: 12-41093 Document: 00512373108 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/13/2013
No. 12-41093

The offense of possession with intent to distribute requires proof of

(1) possession, (2) knowledge, and (3) intent to distribute. United States v.

Vasquez, 677 F.3d 685, 694 (5th Cir. 2012). Although a jury ordinarily may infer

that a defendant has knowledge of the presence of drugs in a vehicle from his

control over the vehicle, when the contraband is hidden, as in this case, this

court requires additional circumstantial evidence that is suspicious in nature or

demonstrates guilty knowledge. Villareal, 324 F.3d at 324. Rios-Morales

asserts that there is insufficient evidence of his knowing possession of the

hidden cocaine.

As with the conspiracy count, the value of the drugs and the inconsistent

statements support an inference that Rios-Morales knew of the cocaine’s

presence in the car. See Villareal, 324 F.3d at 324-25. In addition, Rios-Morales

was visibly nervous when questioned at the Pharr port of entry on March 31 and

following his arrest. Although nervousness can be a normal reaction to those

circumstances, it may also support an inference of guilty knowledge when

viewed in context with other evidence suggesting it derived from consciousness

of criminal behavior. United States v. Diaz-Carreon, 915 F.2d 951, 954 (5th Cir.

1990). 

Viewing the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict, we

conclude that a rational trier of fact could have found that the evidence

established the offense elements beyond a reasonable doubt. Accordingly, the

judgment is AFFIRMED.

3

 Case: 12-41093 Document: 00512373108 Page: 3 Date Filed: 09/13/2013