1

The Honorable Warren G. Urbom, United States District Judge for the District

of Nebraska.

United States Court of Appeals

FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

___________

No. 03-1292

___________

United States of America, *

*

Appellee, *

* Appeal from the United States

v. * District Court for the

* District of Nebraska.

Rodrigo Rodriguez-Mendez, *

*

Appellant. *

___________

Submitted: June 19, 2003

Filed: July 15, 2003

___________

Before LOKEN, Chief Judge, RICHARD S. ARNOLD, and BYE, Circuit Judges.

___________

BYE, Circuit Judge.

A jury found Rodrigo Rodriguez-Mendez guilty of conspiracy to distribute and

possession with intent to distribute 500 grams or more of a mixture or substance

containing a detectable amount of methamphetamine in violation of 21 U.S.C.

§§ 841(a)(1), 841(b)(1) and 846; and possession of a firearm during a drug trafficking

crime in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c)(1)(A)(i). The district court1

 sentenced
2

The court imposed a life sentence on Count I (conspiracy), a 480-month

sentence on Count II (possession with intent to distribute), and a 60-month sentence

on Count III (firearm possession). The court ordered the sentences for Counts I and

II to run concurrently and the sentence for Count III to run consecutively. 

-2-

Rodriguez-Mendez to imprisonment for life plus 60 months.2

 Rodriguez-Mendez

appeals challenging the sufficiency of the evidence. We affirm the judgment and

sentence.

I

We review the evidence in the light most favorable to the verdict and accept

all reasonable inferences as established. United States v. Jimenez-Villasensor, 270

F.3d 554, 558 (8th Cir. 2001). The evidence at trial, consisting largely of testimony

from other members of the conspiracy, established fairly the following facts:

On August 27, 2001, officers from Grand Island, Nebraska, stopped a vehicle

for leaving a local gas station without paying. The officers recognized the driver,

Rodriguez-Mendez, as a federal fugitive. In an uncontested search of the vehicle, the

officers discovered 50 grams of methamphetamine and a loaded Derringer firearm.

Officers arrested Rodriguez-Mendez. He was thereafter charged with conspiracy to

distribute and possession with intent to distribute methamphetamine, and possession

of a firearm during a drug trafficking crime.

 

Nebraska State Patrol Investigator Wendy Brehm testified she met an informant

on March 23, 2001, to plan the purchase of one ounce of methamphetamine for $500

from Raymundo Green Chavez, a/k/a Mundo. When Investigator Brehm and the

informant arrived at the purchase location, Rodriguez-Mendez came to the door and

told the informant to return in thirty minutes. Mundo was not present. After

returning, Rodriguez-Mendez gave Investigator Brehm a plastic bag containing 32.46

grams of meth in exchange for $500.
-3-

Government’s evidence indicated Rodriguez-Mendez sourced, priced and

delivered methamphetamine to Charles Knapp, Raymond Saenz, Manuel Zamudio

and Shawna Jennings, three of whom pleaded guilty to conspiracy to distribute

methamphetamine and testified about their drug-related activities with RodriguezMendez. The pricing arrangements indicated an agreement to distribute controlled

substances. As an example, Rodriguez-Mendez provided methamphetamine to Saenz

and Zamudio and agreed to accept payment upon the drugs being resold. 

Knapp testified he purchased in May or June of 2000 methamphetamine for

personal use and to sell from a dealer named Mundo. Knapp explained Mundo

directed him to purchase methamphetamine from Rodriguez-Mendez when Mundo

was unavailable. Knapp purchased approximately two pounds of methamphetamine

in the following month from Rodriguez-Mendez. Because he was distributing large

amounts of methamphetamine, Rodriguez-Mendez and Mundo came to his home in

an effort to make a deal to become his exclusive suppliers. Knapp also testified

Rodriguez-Mendez was Mundo’s supplier.

Saenz and Zamudio testified each were initially supplied methamphetamine by

Mundo. Upon being approached by Rodriguez-Mendez concerning drug debts each

owed to Mundo, they nevertheless received methamphetamine directly from him.

Raymond Saenz testified he purchased approximately 20 pounds of

methamphetamine from Rodriguez-Mendez between the end of 2000 and May 2001.

Zamudio testified to transacting four separate purchases from Rodriguez-Mendez

aggregating two pounds of methamphetamine. Zamudio shared a pound of the

methamphetamine obtained from Rodriguez-Mendez with his partner, Ed Emler. 

Shawna Jennings and her landlord in February 2001 purchased

methamphetamine and paid off a drug debt to Mundo, according to her testimony.

A week later Jennings met Rodriguez-Mendez when she was included in a meeting

with Mundo. Rodriguez-Mendez advised Jennings he was Mundo’s boss and
-4-

Jennings should contact him (Rodriguez-Mendez) should she need anything.

Jennings further testified she commenced delivering methamphetamine for

Rodriguez-Mendez in exchange for personal use methamphetamine and money. On

three occasions she transported a quarter-pound of methamphetamine to a camper for

him. Upon leaving the methamphetamine under a seat in the camper she delivered

a white envelope from it to Rodriguez-Mendez. Jennings subsequently learned the

camper belonged to Ed Emler. 

II

We review the sufficiency of the evidence to sustain a conviction de novo.

United States v. Cruz, 285 F.3d 692, 697 (8th Cir. 2002). Citing United States v.

Carper, 942 F.2d 1298, 1302 (8th Cir. 1991), Rodriguez-Mendez argues the evidence

was insufficient to show he conspired to distribute methamphetamine. He concedes

evidence exists of his illegal drug-related activities, but argues the government failed

to prove the methamphetamine transactions were something more than a series of

isolated sales. Specifically, he argues his involvement was neither voluntary or

knowing. This court disagrees.

To support a conviction for a conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine, the

government must demonstrate (1) a conspiracy, including an agreement to distribute

controlled substances; (2) defendant knew of the conspiracy; and (3) intentionally

joined the conspiracy. United States v. Romero, 150 F.3d 821, 824 (8th Cir. 1998).

Evidence must demonstrate defendant entered an agreement with at least an

additional individual which had as its object a violation of law. United States v.

Robinson, 217 F.3d 560, 564 (8th Cir. 2000). Upon the conspiracy being established

any evidence connecting the defendant with the conspiracy is sufficient to prove the

defendant’s involvement. United States v. Shoffner, 71 F.3d 1429, 1433 (8th Cir.

1995) (citation and quotation marks omitted).
-5-

Evidence demonstrates Rodriguez-Mendez was the central link to a broadbased network of suppliers, recruiting individuals to distribute drugs, thereby

intentionally joining the conspiracy. Members of the conspiracy included him,

Raymundo Green Chavez (Mundo), Charles Knapp, Raymond Saenz, Manuel

Zamudio and Shawna Jennings. While all of the participants may not have known

each other, such is not necessary to prove a conspiracy. Romero, 150 F.3d at 825.

Sufficient evidence was in the record for the jury to conclude Rodriguez-Mendez was

a voluntary and knowing participant in an agreement to buy and sell

methamphetamine. An agreement to join a conspiracy “need not be explicit but may

be inferred from the facts and circumstances of the case.” United States v. Evans, 970

F.2d 663, 669 (10th Cir. 1992). There is no evidence Rodriguez-Mendez was under

threat or undue influence from another to participate in the conspiracy. The

government presented sufficient evidence at trial to support specific findings of five

or more participants in the conspiracy, Rodriguez-Mendez exercising decisionmaking authority and control over one or more of the co-conspirators, determining

the price of the methamphetamine, and recruiting individuals to participate in the

scheme.

Rodriguez-Mendez additionally asserts evidence by cooperating witnesses

becomes suspect as it was offered for plea agreements. Three of four government

witnesses pleaded guilty to conspiracy to distribute methamphetamine while

admitting a possibility it was for a lower sentence in return for testimony. There is

no evidence promises had been made in exchange for such testimony. United States

v. Slaughter, 128 F.3d 623, 628 (8th Cir. 1997). The jury was capable of evaluating

the credibility of testimony given in light of the agreements each witness received

from the government. The appellate court is not required to re-weigh the evidence

or judge credibility of witnesses. United States v. Buford, 108 F.3d 151, 153 (8th Cir.

1997).
-6-

III

We affirm the judgment of conviction and sentence of the district court.

A true copy.

Attest:

CLERK, U.S. COURT OF APPEALS, EIGHTH CIRCUIT.