### IN THE UNITED STATES C O URT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIFTH CIRCUIT

___________________ No. 1 8

- 41047 Summary Calendar

___________________ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA , Plaintiff

- Appell ee

v. EDDIE VAN GREEN, JR. , Defendant

- Appell ant

_______________________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the South er n District of Texas USDC No. 5:18

- CR

- 294

- 1

_______________________ B efore HIGGINBOTHAM, HO , and ENGELHARDT, Circuit Judges.
PER CURIAM: ∗ Eddie Van Green, Jr. appeals his jury convictions and sentences for one count of conspiracy to transport an undocumented alien and five counts of transporting an undocumented alien for financial gain. Green contends that the trial evidence was insufficien t to prove that he knew of the presence or alienage of 35 undocumented persons discovered in his trailer at a border checkpoint, that he had the requisite intent to form a conspiracy to transport

* Pursuant to 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5 , the court has determined that this opinion should not be published and is not precedent except under the limited circumstances set forth in 5 TH C IR

. R. 47.5.4

. United States Court of Appeals Fifth Circuit 

### FILED September 19, 2019 Lyle W. Cayce Clerk Case: 18-41047 Document: 00515124492 Page: 1 Date Filed: 09/19/2019No. 1 8

- 41047

2 undocumented aliens, or that he sought to profit or gain fin ancially from his endeavor. We affirm. Green’s sufficiency arguments overlook the rule that the trial evidence must be viewed “in the light most favorable to the prosecution,” Jackson v. Virginia , 443 U.S. 307, 319 (1979), and need not “exclude every reas onable hypothesis of innocence or be wholly inconsistent with every conclusion except that of guilt... , ” United States v. Lewis , 774 F.3d 837, 841 (5 th Cir. 2014) (internal quotation marks and citation omitted). Based on the combined testimony of the Govern ment’s witnesses, the jury could reasonably infer that Green both knew the aliens were in his trailer and knew of or recklessly disregarded their unlawful status. See United States v. Chon , 713 F.3d 812,
818

- 19 (5 th Cir. 2013). And it was free to discred it Green’s implicit claim that 35 aliens were discreetly loaded into his trailer while he napped unaware. See United States v. Mendoza , 522 F.3d, 482, 489 (5 th Cir. 2008). Because the jury’s construction of the evidence was reasonable, see United States v. Meza , 701 F.3d 411, 422

- 23 (5 th Cir. 2012), its findings that Green was a knowing participant in the alien transport conspiracy and that he knowingly transported undocumented aliens were not irrational, see United States v. Lopez

- Urbina , 434 F.3d 750, 7 57 (5 th Cir. 2005). Furthermore, notwithstanding the absence of direct evidence of financial motive, the jury could “reasonably infer [Green’s] financial purpose from the quantum of the Government’s circumstantial proof.” United States v. Garcia , 888 F.3d 570, 575 (5 th Cir.), cert. denied , 138 S. Ct. 2006 (2018); see 8 U.S.C. § 1324(a)(2)(B)(ii). Jurors could reasonably infer both that Green did not previously know the individuals being smuggled and that others in the same smuggling operation had received or would receive money for their efforts. See United States v. Ruiz

- Hernandez , 890 F.3d 202, 210 (5 th Cir. 2018); Garcia 883 Case: 18-41047 Document: 00515124492 Page: 2 Date Filed: 09/19/2019No. 1 8

- 41047

3 F.3d at 576. Thus, their finding that Green acted with a financial motive was not irrational. See Lopez

- Urbina , 434 F.3d at 757. The evidence suffices to support the verdicts in this case. The judgment
is AFFIRMED. Case: 18-41047 Document: 00515124492 Page: 3 Date Filed: 09/19/2019