Pursuant to 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5, the court has determined that thi s opinion should not * be publishe d and is not precedent except under the limited circu mstance s set forth in 5 T H C IR . R. 47.5 .4. 

### INTHE UNI TED S TATESCOU RT OFAPPEALS

FORTHEFIFTH CIRCU IT

N o. 08- 31146 Su m m ar y Cal endar

U N IT E D S T A T E S O F AM E R IC A , P la in tiff-A p p e lle e ,
ve r s us T E R R YB O O T Y , D efen d a n t- A p p ell a n t
.

A pp ealf

rom t h e U n i t ed S t ates D i st ri ctC ou rt f o rt he Eas t e r n Di s t r i c to f Lo ui s i ana N o. 2: 07- C R

- 182- 6

B ef ore S M ITH , ST E W A R T , an d S O U T H W IC K , C i rcui tJu dg es . P E R C U R IA M: *

Ter r y Boo t y w as c o nvi c t e d o f c o ns pir ac y t o di s t r ibut e and po s s e s s w i t h t he i nt entt o di st r ib u te 5 0 0 g ra m s orm or e o f a m i xt ure ors ubst ance c ont ai ni ng a United States Court of App eals

Fifth Circuit 

### F I L E D September

10, 2009 Cha rl es R. F ulb ru g e II I ClerkN o. 08- 31146

2 detect able am ou n t of m et h am ph et am i n e. H e ap pea l s t h e den i al of h i s m ot i on f o rn e w t r i a la n da c q u i t t a l
. We f i n dn o e r r o ra n da f

f i r m.
I. D u ri n g a 20 0 6 i n ve sti ga tion , D ru g E n forcem en t A d m i n i stration ag en ts di scovered B oot y’ s m et h am ph et am i n e d rug t raf f i cki n g act ivi t i es. Tri alevi den ce show ed that B oot y f

i rst pa rt i ci pa t ed i n an d even t u al l y controll ed an operati on thati m po r t ed m et h am ph et am i n e f rom C al i f

orni a i n t o L ou i si an a. Dur i ng theo pe r a tio n , h e w o r k e din c o n c e r tw i t h o t h e r s t o c o n c e a la n dt r a n s p o r ta p p r o x im a te ly t w o po und s of

m et ham phet am i ne eac h t r i p; i n al l , h e t r anspo r t ed nea r l y ni net yt w o p o u n d s . L a w e n f o r c e me n to f

f i c i a l s s e i z e dfo u ro u n c e s o f t h e r e - s o l dme t h a mphe t am i ne a nd p r e s e nt e d itt o t he j ur y, w hi c h f o und Boo t y guil t y as c har ge d.

II. Boo t y uns uc c e s s f

ul l y m o ve d f

o rne w t r i ala nd ac quit t al
. On app e al , he ch a l l en ge s on l y th e su ff i ci en cyof th e ev i d en ce to con vict.

III. W h en revi ew i n g a cha l l en ge t o the su f f i ci en cy of

t h e evi den ce, t h i s c ou rt “m u s t d e te r m in e w h e th e rara tio n a l tr ie ro f fa c t c o u ldh a v e fo u n dth a t t h e e v id en ce esta b l i sh edg u i l t b ey on da rea son a b l e d ou b t. ” Uni t e d St at e s v . Mi l ls aps , 1 5 7 F
. 3 d9 8 9 , 9 9 4 ( 5 t h C i r . 1 9 9 8 ) (c i t a t i o n s o mi t t e d)
. F u r t h e r , we mu s ta l s o v i e w a l le v i d e n c e a n da n yi n fe r e n c e s t h a tma yb e d r a wn f r o m i ti n t he l i ghtm o s tfav o r ab l e t o t he go ve r nm e nt
. . . . I ti s t he sole p rov i n ce of the j u ry , an d n ot w ith i n the po w er of this C ou rt, to w ei gh conf

l i ct i n g evi den ce and eval u ate th e c redibi l i t y of w i t n esse s . . . . T h is n a r r o w s ta n d a r do f r e v ie w fo rs u ffic i e n c yo f th e e v iden ce c h al l en ges give s fu l lpl ay to th e res pon sibi l i t y of t h e t ri er of factfai rly t o res olve confli ct s i n t est i m on y, t o w ei gh th e ev id e n ce an d to draw reasonab l e i n ferences f rom basi c fact s t o ul t i m ate fact s.N o. 08- 31146

3 Id
. (c i t ati o ns a nd i nt e r nalq uo t at i o n m ar ks o m i t t e d)
. W e dr aw al lr e as o nab l e i nfe r e n c e s ins u p p o r t o f th e ju r yv e r d ic t. I d. B oo ty a rg u es th a t th e fou r ou n ces o f m eth a m p h eta m i n e introd uce d attr i al i s t h e onl y a m o u n t t h e j u ry coul d h ave reason ably at t ribu t ed to h i s act ivi t i es. T h e g o v e r n m e n t , h o w e v e r , p r e s e n t e du n d i s p u t e dt e s t im o n yth a t B o o typ e r s o n a ll y pa rt i ci pa t ed i n a seri es of drugt ran sact i on s, al lof w h i ch i n divi du al l y i n volved
m ore than 5 00 gram s of m et h am ph et am i n e. Tw o w i t n esses t est i f i ed that t h ey act ed as couri ers f

or B oot y’ s t raf

f i cki n g act ivi t i es. A n ot h er of fered detai l ed tes

ti m on y ide n tifyi n g h i m self as B oo ty’ s su p p l i er for tw o ye a rs. F i n a l l y, th ree w i tne s s e s t e s t i f

i e d t hat Boo t y w as t he i rs o ur c e o f m ul t i

- po und qua nt i t i e s o f m e t ha m p h e ta m in e . B o o t ya l s o co n te n d s th a t t h e te s tim o n yo f c o -c o n s p ir a to r s is “in h e r e n tly susp ect” an d that “ a rati on alt ri er of fact w ou l d not h ave given credi t t o t h ei r t est i m o ny. ” But , “ [ a] s l o ng as i ti s no tfac t uall y i ns ubs t ant i alo ri nc r e dibl e , t he uncorro b ora tedtesti m on y o f aco-con sp i r at or , ev en on e w h o h a s ch ose n to coop era te
w ith th e g o v e r n m e n t in e x c h a n g e fo rn o n -p r o s e c u tio n o rle n ie n c y , m a yb e co n s titu ti on a l l y su ff

i ci en t evide n ce to con vict. ” Uni t e d St at e s v . Me di na , 161 F. 3d 867, 872- 73 ( 5t h Ci r . 1 99 8) (c i t at i o ns a nd i nt e r nalq uo t at i o n m ar ks o m i t t e d)
. The sei zure of

f o ur oun ces of

m et h am ph et am i n e l en ds an add i t i on albasi s f or t h e j u ry to cr e d it t h e te s tim o n ya n dre a c h ag u iltyv e r d i c ta s to th e la r g e rq u a n tit ya ll ege d. Vi ew ed i n t he l i ghtm os tfavor abl e t o t he gover nm ent , the evi denc e w as s uf f i c i e ntt o pe r m i ta r at i o nal t r i e r o f fac tt o f i nd Bo o t y guil t y be yo nd ar e as o na b l e d ou b t. AF F I RMED.